John,

First, define what YOU mean by "cognition" and "consciousness". Can you do it? What do you mean by "cognition" and "consciousness"?

I AM saying that differentiation (the discerning of difference) is basic consciousness.

I am saying that consciousness is a NECESSARY aspect of a system, because it is necessary that a differentiated system (differentiated into what we would represent as equations, variables and numbers) can differentiate (discern difference in) its own equations, variables and numbers (more correctly, what we would represent as its own equations, variables and numbers).

"Energy (and position etc.) are FULLY COVERED by the law of nature relationships, i.e. they are fully representable by equations, i.e. there's nothing more that can be said about them." Lorraine ford | FALSE

"If you want to claim that energy is MORE than a relationship, MORE than a thing that is represented by an equation, then you are implying that energy is a voodoo entity with a personality." Lorraine ford | NON SEQUITUR

Numbers are quantitative descriptors. They can be used to quantify. That is describe how much or how many of something, The various categories that are the variables used in equations can be represented by a symbol or can be quantified. When quantified the number represents an amount of the variable. So the relations of the variables in the equation still applies.

Lorraine,

People have been struggling to explain 'consciousness' since antiquity, but generally it is agreed to be a product of mental processes however limited our understanding of how those might develop. That doesn't limit it to humans, but certainly narrows it down. 'Cognition' as defined by Webster is the process of knowing, or the capacity to gain knowledge. A rose by any other name is still a rose, not a mentality. It may well be observed to open its petals toward the sun but that doesn't mean it has a capacity to know it.

It is actually quite difficult NOT to anthropomorphize word meanings in discussions of physical fundamentals and foundations, perhaps that is why the dry empirical artifice of mathematics (a product of mental processes) is preferred by most in the physics community as a means of removing oneself from the equation. jrc

John,

I am saying that differentiation (the discerning of difference) is basic consciousness.

I am saying that consciousness is a logically NECESSARY aspect of a system, because it is logically necessary that a differentiated system differentiates (discerns difference in) itself.

This logically necessary aspect of a system can only be represented by Boolean and algorithmic symbols.

Georgina,

Energy doesn't have a personality. Energy is the same type of thing as position, mass and charge etc., i.e. energy is a thing that is represented by an equation. Energy is a category, a relationship.

Energy is a category, NOT a quantity. Energy is not a number, but a number (e.g. n1) can be assigned to it, in which case information about energy can be represented as: "energy=n1 IS TRUE".

The energy category/ relationship, and the numbers that are assigned to the energy category, do NOT explain why the numbers that apply to the energy category and other categories are jumping to new values. And they do not explain who or what is jumping the numbers.

To represent number movement/ jumping, you need to use Boolean and algorithmic symbols.

Georgina,

Energy doesn't have a personality. Energy is the same type of thing as position, mass and charge etc., i.e. energy is a thing that is represented by an equation. Energy is a category, a relationship.

Energy is a category, NOT a quantity. Energy is not a number, but a number (e.g. n1) can be assigned to it, in which case information about energy can be represented as: "energy=n1 IS TRUE".

The energy category/ relationship, and the numbers that are assigned to the energy category, do NOT explain why the numbers that apply to the energy category and other categories are jumping to new values. And they do not explain who or what is jumping the numbers.

To represent number movement/ jumping, you need to use Boolean and algorithmic symbols.

    Georgina,

    I should add that "quantity" is a high-level concept. "Quantity" is a word used by human beings.

    But there are no "quantities" happening at a fundamental level; no "quantities" exist at a fundamental level.

    What DOES exist is something that we would represent by number symbols.

    Symbol KE represents an unknown or unspecified amount of kinetic energy. KE is a variable, as opposed to a constant. That means its amount can vary. When quantified (by replacing the KE symbol with a number and keeping the energy units being used in mind for later application) it still represents an amount of energy; but now of known or specified amount.----Of course there are amounts of existence, and amounts of certain properties of that existence in material reality but just not given a number symbol to represent it -

    Happening is as foundational as existence. There is no scale at which there is absolute stillness. Being, existence involves happening, and probably is necessary for it. At close to absolute zero test samples cease to behave as atomic matter.

    Physicists symbolically represent the world by equations, variables and number symbols. To make these symbols represent a moving system, physicists differentiate (discern difference in) the symbols, and physicists move and change the symbols. In other words, physicists are part of the system of representation. The equations, variables and number symbols alone do not represent a standalone moving system.

    Human beings can never fully extract themselves from their symbols. However, to symbolically represent a stand-alone moving system, you need to include Boolean and algorithmic symbols to replace the physicist. I.e. you need to include Boolean and algorithmic symbols to represent the world differentiating itself (discerning difference in itself), and to represent the world moving itself, which includes, what we would represent as, the assignment of new numbers to the variables.

    What we would represent as the assignment of new numbers to the variables is NOT what the law of nature relationships are doing: the symbols that represent the law of nature relationships merely represent passive relationships between categories.

    Differentiating (discerning difference) corresponds to basic consciousness; assigning new numbers to the variables corresponds to basic agency.

      Algorithms, by name, have been part in parcel of mathematics for 1200 years. In fact the word 'algorithm' originated as an honor to the Arab polymath al-Khuwarizmi in the Latin translation of his Arabic text ~825 A.D. introducing the Hindu place value system of 9 digits and 0, and specifically refers to the procedures and rules for computation of arithmetic calculations. That rule based convention making it possible for mathematicians to communicate, collaborate and expand upon the works of each other, has continued to expand with the growth and revolutionary periods in mathematics with its application to all fields of science. Throughout, terminology, symbols and forms has evolved, changed and come in and out of favor. But always, those rules which have withstood axiomatic rigor have remained in use and have been the basis in teaching mathematics, whether they are identified by the word 'algorithm' or not. The Quantum revolution in mathematics was exponentially accelerated by the January 1939 paper by Lise Mitner, 8 months prior to the outbreak of WWII, revealing to the industrial powers of the world that an isotope of uranium could be made to fission and release nearly incomprehensible amounts of energy. Yet in the 1944 printing of the 1941 copyright 5th Edition of Webster's Collegiate Dictionary gifted my Mother from her Father when she was in college in 1948, 'algorithm' is not listed. 'Algorism' is listed and simply defined as 1. The art of calculating by means of nine figures and zero. 2. The art of calculating with any species of notation; as, the algorisms of fractions, surds, etc.. Algorithm as a word was reinvigorated (ad nauseum) by the computer age, but physicists have been filing dry erase boards and blackboards before them with algorithmic operational symbols and notations all along. And discovery comes not from what symbols you employ, but from your mind. Choice of symbols is a fickle task master. And instructing a computer may get you the result you already know you want, but telling other people to do what you want, usually gets an opposite and equal to or greater than reaction. jrc

      "...To make these symbols represent a moving system, physicists differentiate (discern difference in) the symbols, and physicists move and change the symbols. "Lorraine ford| Not necessarily. " However, to symbolically represent a stand-alone moving system, you need to include Boolean and algorithmic symbols to replace the physicist." Lorraine ford| False v and a are representations of properties that are kinds of moving.

      Georgi,

      Agreed, The form of many of the algebraic results that are the standard fare of undergrad coursework, are by definition an algorithm of the earliest kind. F=ma has the same form as p=mv (momentum) and are the results of comparative analysis of differential calculus across a broad range of real measured value sample experimental observations. Where more modern criteria of algorithmic procedure can be helpful would be in such transformations as might be sought for the rate of change from a force translating into a transfer of momentum. (a) being a positive or negative changing speed, and (v) being a uniform speed. jrc

      First two paragraphs: Targeted at individuals, rather than at science content. Therefore inappropriate.

      Denigration of others and self aggrandizement does not affect whether your argument about physics is valid or not. You have added nothing new to that argument.

      For the benefit of those that don't know, I'll explain what an algorithm is. An algorithm is a set of step by step instructions for performing a task or solving a problem, e.g. the detailed series of steps required to put rubbish in a bin, or the detailed series of steps required to solve a mathematical equation.

      A mathematical equation, on the other hand, is a string of symbols that represents a static relationship.

      The steps in an algorithm are represented by special symbols. Word symbols are OK, but to avoid ambiguity, you need to use Boolean and algorithmic symbols. Precision and detail are also needed: no step can be omitted, and every step must be correctly expressed and in the correct order, if one wants to perform the task or solve the mathematical equation.

      For example, an algorithm might represent a response to a situation: IF a symbolically-represented situation is TRUE, THEN take these symbolically-represented steps. These steps might involve a "loop", where the same procedure is repeatedly followed. The steps might be the steps required to find the solution(s) to an equation.

      So, are there foundational aspects of the world that can only be represented algorithmically (by Boolean and algorithmic symbols) as opposed to the aspect of the world that is represented by equations? Clearly, there ARE foundational aspects of the world that can only be represented algorithmically.

        Equations, even equations that include delta symbols like the physics' equations that represent the laws of nature, equations can only ever symbolically represent static relationships.

        In contrast to equations, algorithms can symbolically represent awareness and movement.

        Algorithms (strings of symbols including Boolean and algorithmic symbols) can represent the awareness of situation, the analysis of situation, and actions taken in response to situation.

        Equations can never represent particular situations in time or space or whatever. Only algorithms can symbolically represent particular situations in time or space (or whatever).

        Algorithms are a completely different thing to equations. Algorithms can't be derived from equations, and algorithms are not implied by equations.

        Algorithms represent a completely different aspect of the world to the aspect of the world represented by equations.

        P.S.

        Equations can never represent particular situations in time or space or whatever.

        Only algorithms (strings of symbols including Boolean and algorithmic symbols) can symbolically represent particular situations in time or space (or whatever).

        So, the following type of thing is an example of how one would symbolically represent a particular situation:

        "(v1=n1 AND v2=n2 AND v3=n3) IS TRUE"

        (where the symbols v1, v2 and v3 represent variables, and the symbols n1, n2 and n3 represent numbers).

        How to drive a car is fundamentally different to the car. How to handle an equation is fundamentally different to the equation. The algorithmic steps required to handle an equation are fundamentally different to the equation.

        The equations that represent the laws of nature do not represent a moving world: it is the physicist and the equations together that represent a moving world. The physicist makes up for the deficiencies in the symbolic equations, which despite the delta symbols merely represent static relationships: the physicist makes the equations move.

        To extricate the physicist from the symbolic representation of the world, one needs to use Boolean and algorithmic symbols to represent what the physicist is doing: the physicist is discerning difference in the symbols in the equations, and the physicist is moving and changing the symbols in the equations.

        The world is a differentiated system, differentiated into what we would represent by equations, variables and number symbols. It is logically necessary that a differentiated system must differentiate itself (i.e. discern difference in, what we would represent by, equations, variables and number symbols).

        The world is a moving system. It is logically necessary that a moving system must move itself (i.e., what we would represent by, the assignment of new number symbols to variables).

        The discerning of difference, and the assignment of numbers, can only be represented by Boolean and algorithmic symbols.

        Lorraine -- where to begin?

        You are suggesting that an equation is not objectively independent of the equation maker -- well, then, why write equations at all?

        I think I'll just leave it there.