Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Previous Contests

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Wilhelmus Wilde: on 10/23/13 at 14:33pm UTC, wrote Just a test to see if the mail system is still active

Georgina Woodward: on 8/13/13 at 21:03pm UTC, wrote Thanks Wilhelmus, I think I have a better understanding of what you mean...

Wilhelmus Wilde: on 8/13/13 at 15:21pm UTC, wrote Dear Georgina, First I am sorry that I did not reply to your post of...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/13/13 at 0:02am UTC, wrote Hi Wilhelmus, sorry if it is an awkward question. I'm popping by...

Wilhelmus Wilde: on 8/8/13 at 14:35pm UTC, wrote Yes Yuri already in june Wilhelmus

Wilhelmus Wilde: on 8/8/13 at 14:34pm UTC, wrote dear Paul, The photon as a time carrier is quite a new and fascinating...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 22:13pm UTC, wrote Dear Wilhelmus, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the...

Yuri Danoyan: on 8/7/13 at 3:36am UTC, wrote Hi Wilhelmus Are you rated my essay? Yuri


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jonathan Dickau: "Your point about crises is largely correct Lorraine.. The idea that "the..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Jonathan Dickau: "Thanks for the many thoughtful comments.. I am happy my blatant..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Steve, Attempting to account for complex finite invisible particles..." in Bohemian Reality:...

Alfredo Oliveira: "Dear Domenico I agree with what you say about my suggestion. It was just a..." in Towards a Goal — Two...

Steve Agnew: "The basic issue with quantum measurements is that once an observer measures..." in Bohemian Reality:...

alex: "bạn đang tìm một địa chỉ bán các dòng máy photocopy RIcoh..." in Wrinkles in Spacetime

James Putnam: "Sears and Zemansky 13th ed. Summary of Chapter ! (page 26): "Physical..." in Alternative Models of...

Steve Agnew: "These are operational definitions just as S&Z state in the 13th Ed. just..." in Alternative Models of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

The Spacetime Revolutionary
Carlo Rovelli describes how black holes may transition to "white holes," according to loop quantum gravity, a radical rewrite of fundamental physics.

Riding the Rogue Quantum Waves
Could giant sea swells help explain how the macroscopic world emerges from the quantum microworld? (Image credit: MIT News)


FQXi FORUM
March 30, 2017

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: THE QUEST FOR THE PRIMAL SEQUENCE by Wilhelmus de Wilde [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 16:02 GMT
Essay Abstract

Abstract : Our perception of reality is in a deterministic way expressed in the choice between extremities. Binary/digital bits : zero and one/ yes or no. Latest research is pointing more and more towards the choice of one PURE State that is one of an infinite number of possibilities between these two extremities. There are more possibilities between Particle and Wave. We argue that in the search for the essence of matter and reality we become more and more aware that :"matter does not matter". Matter is one of the “Crealities” * (Creation of Realities) from our consciousness. A quantum computer , where the “Qubit” is the follow up of the “Bit” is one of the new ways to try to understand the layers emerging in our experience of reality. The infinite numbers of vectors of the Bloch sphere ,that represent any possible state of qubit, join the non duality of the particle/wave state. The Creality of time is expressed in "Neural coding" where we discover indications of timeless treatment of information between neurons. The creation of the reality of time and so the Creality of space/time is a direct action of our non-causal consciousness in cooperation with what we call the “Primal Sequence”, the origin of origins. In order to get a better control of our Crealities we have to continue to expand our understanding of this ultimate Primal Sequence, this will however be an asymptotical one.

Author Bio

Born the 26'th of July 1945. Studied at the Technical University of Delft. Married in 1978 with Corrine and has two sons that live in Holland. Grade : Engineer in 1987 (architecture). Lives in France (retired). Interests: Science, Philosophy.

Download Essay PDF File




Antony Ryan wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:41 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I liked the Planck time viewpoint which you explored in your essay, along with Schrödinger's cat. Nice concept of "crealities" too.

Hopefully you get chance to look at my essay too.

Best Wishes

Antony

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 14:43 GMT
Thanks Antony, I am going to read your essay now and will react on your thread.




Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:46 GMT
Uncle de Wilde

Glad to see Uncle here.

It seems the theme of "consciousness" is the forte of Uncle, and this has been reflected in a deeper level.

A high score instead of greeting to the forum.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 14:45 GMT
Good afternoon Uncle Hoang,

It is good to have your support, thank you.

I will react on your essay asap and also rate it.

Wilhelmus




Michel Planat wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 09:53 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I am intrigued by your essay and I have tried to understand the basic idea.

It seems that your sentence

"Our neurons are part of the operative causal chain, taking place in the (our) future (on the time-line) and "managed" by our non-causal timeless part of consciousness that" "activates" a vector of the Primal Sequence , this collaboration with our non-causal part of the consciousness we explain as the activity of the sub-consciousness."

collects much that you want to tell us, when one also adds that a kind of "qubit" non-causal scheme may do the job. Am I right?

These ideas are not so heretical if you relate them to the strange effects qubits may display such as non-locality (a form of non-causality) and entanglement when you go beyond the single qubit Bloch sphere.

Good luck for the contest.

Michel

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 14:52 GMT
Michel,

Indeed there is in a "qubit" state an infinity of non-causal probabilities, just because of the fact that these states are not "realised" in in a life-line that is created by our consciousness, all these states however are "available".

I think that non-locality and entanglement are not heretical at all, they are just an aspect of the "reality" that we are aware of AS FOR NOW. The interpretations we are giving in the form of all kind of physical theories and philosophies may seem heretical at a specific era of our history, but will become accepted as "normal" in another era.

Wilhelmus




Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 11:27 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

While not agreeing with all the assertions made, the philosophical discussion sits well with me.

You wrote: "However there are already new but not yet "proved" propositions that these quarks and leptons are not actually tiny “balls” (again) , but are containing smaller particles which physicists call "preons". If these preons ... are also considered as “point-like” meaning having no dimension[?]

The question mark in square bracket is yours, implying you find this doubtful. Perhaps, your preons are same as monads, which I discuss here. You might also enjoy my references to Plato's views which I alo find in your essay.

All the best,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 15:12 GMT
Dear Akinbo,

The question mark is indeed implying that I do not have an answer nor an interpretation of this theory. My interpretation however of "reality" is that our so called "material" reality has limits, the reality as we are aware of is emerging from a lower level, and from our reality is again emerging a higher reality.

The "construction" of matter is a product of physics, and physics gives us the four forces among them the standard model of partcles, and the four fundamental interactions of nature : gravitation, elecromagnetic force, weak interaction and strong force

But if we go deeper and deeper in this core we only are meeting lesser and lesser so what about thiese interaction that is said to be the one taht is colliding the core ?

The Higgs Boson is to be the origin of the Higgs field, resposible for the "mass" of particles, but what if the mass of particles is only an emerging property ?

Wilhelmus



Akinbo Ojo replied on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 10:41 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus,

You hit the nail on the head by asking in your reply what if mass... is an emerging property? Wheeler also suspects, mass may be from the massless, ...

You didnt say whether your "preons" can be similar to my monads, or perhaps you will answer that later? Then what do you mean by 'point-like'? Is it zero-dimension or not?

Regards,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 13:48 GMT
Dear Akinbo,

Your "monads" as they were used by Leibniz, are not similar to the idea of preons. I took the fork in the road that led me to the conclusion that the material universe cannot be divided ad infintum into smaller parts, this deterministic thinking leads to "singularities" and I just cannot imagine that a dimesionless point (whatever it may be, it can just be a "NOTHING") ledas to a reality. In my perception it is consciousness that is tha origin of our CREALITY, and our so called material universe is (untill now) limited by the Planck length and time. The monads of Leibniz are atomistic and represent "matter". In my perception ""IT" doesn't "MATTER", because matter is only existing in our memories. ALL point like reperentations of matter lead to paradoxes.

best regards

Wilhelmus




Eckard Blumschein wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 11:59 GMT
Wilhelmus de Wilde,

While I see your Crealities possibly inspired by Wheeler's speculations, you did not make this link plausibly obvious to me. For instance, I wonder if Wheeler did agree with your "infinite duration of the present moment" and other bewildering utterances of you. Wheeler was a successful physicist.

Eckard

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 15:20 GMT
Eckard,

I understand that you cannot agree with some or perhaps most of my inetrepretations of reality. I am not asking to be agreed upon I just participate my ideas to be discussed. If Archibal Wheeler would agrre....I just don't know, I wish he should still be there to give his opinion. My "bewildering" utterances are just interpretations of the present viewpoints of some also "successful" physicists. But succesfull means that your opinion is shared with a lot of others, and that is not nececerrely the ONLY hypothesis regarding the perception of our reality.

Thank you for your rating

Wilhelmus




Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 16:29 GMT
Respectfully Wilhelmus,

I found your essay to be truly engrossing. I unequivocally agree with your masterful assertion that: “Every primal sequence has in itself ALL probabilities because this noumenon is infinite and cannot be devised in parts like before and after.”

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 17:17 GMT
Thank you very much Joe




Manuel S Morales wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 18:10 GMT
Wilhelmus,

I enjoyed your unique perspective and terminology of matter as, "Matter is one of the “Crealities” * (Creation of Realities) from our consciousness." I searched for how you attempted to describe how such Crealities come to exist. It seems that you are saying that reality is a cognitive phenomenon. This leads me to ask, how do Qubits come into existence? I must have missed this point.

I appreciate your originality and insight, well done. I hope you will have a chance to review my entry as well.

report post as inappropriate

Manuel S Morales replied on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 00:05 GMT
BTW - I have rated your essay highly and was wondering if you found my essay worthy of the same consideration?

Manuel

report post as inappropriate


Philip Gibbs wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 18:50 GMT
Wilhelmus, this is very thought-provoking. I like your synthesis of concepts: conciousness, acausality, the pure state, qubits and the primal sequence of information. It fits well with my way of seeing things. I hope that more physicists can take on board ideas like this and make progress from it towards a complete theory. Best of luck.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 14:20 GMT
Thank you very much Phillip for this encouraging post, you see that I took your essay of last year "The Universe, an effect without Cause" as refernce because that also inspired me.

Wilhelmus




Paul Reed wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 05:09 GMT
Wilhemus

“Our perception of reality is in a deterministic way expressed in the choice between

extremities”

Our perception of reality is irrelevant to the physical circumstance, an independently physically existent representation thereof being what is received. In the case of sight this is known as light.

“Latest research is pointing more and more towards the choice of one PURE State that is one of an infinite number of possibilities between these two extremities”

Any given reality is the physically existent state of whatever comprises it at that time. There is, by definition, only one such state at any time.

“with what we call the “Primal Sequence”, the origin of origins”

You cannot know the ‘origin’ of existence, because you cannot transcend your existence. You can only concern yourself, scientifically, with what is potentially knowable to us. What this ‘ultimately’ is, or how it came about, etc, are unanswerable. We are trapped in an existentially closed system, which is a function of a physical process. As always, there may be an alternative to that, but we cannot know it.

“So "time" is the illusion that our consciousness is creating”

Time is neither an illusion, nor does consciousness create anything. Time is concerned with the rate at which realities alter, ie are superseded by the subsequent reality in the sequence. This is what timing does, compares rates of change. In the case of a crystal timing device, for example, the reference is crystal oscillations.

Paul

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 14:28 GMT
Paul,

We have different perceptions of what is reality, this is not starnge at all because every individual ahs a different consciousness and so has different interpretations, which is a good thing because of that we are now discussing...LET THRER BE LIGHT.

What is a "physically existant state" , in my essay the part "dematerialisation" is giving my viewpoint. To me physically existent is only an appearance of the past.

I changed the word "illusion" to "CREALITY". We just cannot agree on your point that consciousness does not create anything, for me it is the opposite, perhaps the truth is in the middle, I just don't know, but untill now ther are no arguments that can convince me of your viewpoint.

best regards and good luck in the contest

Wilhelmus



Paul Reed replied on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 03:55 GMT
Wilhelmus

“We have different perceptions of what is reality, this is not starnge at all because every individual ahs a different consciousness and so has different interpretations”

Reality is independent of us, and does not occur on the basis of perceptions.

“What is a "physically existant state"

The physical state that whatever exists is in, ie reality at that time.

“To me physically existent is only an appearance of the past”

Obviously, in the sense that for it to “appear”, ie be potentially knowable, it must exist first. But then the key word is appear. The appearance of something is not the same as something. We are interested in what existed, not what appeared to do so.

“We just cannot agree on your point that consciousness does not create anything”

Other than a perception, please explain to me how the sensory/brain processing creates anything.

Paul

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 16:27 GMT
Paul:

My perception of consciousness and its possibilities are written in "THE CONSCIOUSNESS CONNECTION", my essay of last year.

You are communicating your own perception of reality, which is true for YOU, but is different for me. I will never try to convince you of my opinion, the only thing I can do is communicate my perceptions and how I am aware of them.

What you call "reality at that time" is the past and does not exist any more.

"Appear" : Everything you are aware of and what you call reality, is processed by your brain and is being experienced as reality but is in fact just the past.That is why it appears different for each of us. Reality is NOT the same for everybody it is NOT existing CREALTY is the only "existing" solipsistic reality that through decoherence is becoming a objective "illusion".(creality of a multitude).(and of course this is only my personal^point of view that I am participating with YOU).




Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 21:02 GMT
Wilhelmus,

A very enjoyable read and original approach, but I found much in agreement with or complimentary to my own findings, always pleasing! Pertinant, well written and organised too. The 'quote' format worked well.

I particularly liked; "the real thing is 3D and in full colour"

Congratulations on a very fine essay, well written, now also well scored.

Best of luck

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 16:45 GMT
Thank you Peter, we both know that it is not easy to sail against the wind, you have to tack and tack and tack, but we will arrive at our goal I hope..

Wilhelmus




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 01:49 GMT
Dear

Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon.

So you can produce material from your thinking. . . .

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 16:55 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

Thank you for your kind reaction , I responded on your thread.

Wilhelmus




James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 18:30 GMT
Wilhelmus,

If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, “It’s good to be the king,” is serious about our subject.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 4, 2013 @ 15:28 GMT
Thank you Jim, I am awaiting your valuation.In the meantime I will read and rate yours, we need to support each other.

Wilhelmus




James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 4, 2013 @ 17:22 GMT
Wilhelmus,

Quite an interesting read, utilizing unique phraseology along the way. You cover a lot of territory and "conscious creality" as you go. I have always been intrigued with the biblical concept,especially after reading Joyce's Ulysses, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God." The poetic phrasing and the deep meaning perhaps represent the concepts we are struggling with, more in support of your thinking -- I might say.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 15:01 GMT
Thank you Jim,

It seems that the essence of most religions is compatible with my "thinking", which gives me a good feeling.

You can eventually read extensive articles that I wrote on the subject in "THE SCIENTIFIC GOD JOURNAL" http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/115 and

http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/232

Wilhelmus





M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 22:52 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

thank you for commenting on my entry and for invitation to read your beautiful, thoughtful, philosophical essay. It reminded me of the old time alchemists forever searching the perfection at its finest in all aspects of life (and beyond :).

"The infinity of the now moment is not only the past or the future, our consciousness is creating out of all the shades of grey in the Primal Sequence a Creality , so the appearance of a materialistic universe." -- beautiful:)

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 15:05 GMT
Thanks Marina,

The thoughts of all participants in this contest give a good rainbow that announces good weather...




KoGuan Leo wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 03:14 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus, I read your essay with great interest. Your concept of the the “Primal Sequence” as "the origin of origins" is very similar with my concept of our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit as Planck's matrix of all matter and also as Maxwell's infinite being, but not his finite being. i also shares your concept of the NOW within the absolute digital time T ≤ 10^-1000sevonds. Please comment and rank my essay. Best wishes, Leo KoGuan

report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 17:12 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I have read your nice work and I find there many for my valuable points that I will take in attention in my future works. I think we going to the same direction despite some difrence of our approaches. I hope my work may be interstig for you.

I will thankfull for your opinion on it. http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1804

Best wishes,

George

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 14:40 GMT
Dear George,

I answered on your thread.

Wilhelmus




Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 15:51 GMT
Dear Leo KoGuan,

"All things are one qubit" touches the "eternal Now" I describe.

"Each T-moment a new qbit emerges" Your T moment is relative shorter as the Planck time that i used, but I also mentioned that this moment wher there is no longer causality may be shorter (as in the latest results from ESA's INTEGRAL gamma ray observatory which have shown that this "graininess" of space is much lesser as the Planck length : 10^-48cm), but in my perception I have to take a certain length which of course is also realtive to our awareness. I lose you with the formula's Leo, this is just abracadraba for me, but I believe that your perceptions are touching your OWN reality.

In my perception the Total Simultaneity, where ALL T-moments are available for our non causal consciousness touches very much your perception of the "creation" of a reality what I call CREALITY.

I just think my dear Leo that we are both on the same path of discovering the Origin of Origins and the Reference of Reference.

I have great admiration for your causal consciousness that has established a deeper contact with Total Simultaneity.

I will rate your essay with respect and honor, as I hope you will do with mineand hope that we can in the future assembling of T-moments deepen our thoughts.

Wilhelmus




Don Limuti wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 18:09 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus,

I like your essay and rate it highly. You are to be praised for aiming high with clarity.

Of course I can nitpick a little, I find that the use of the concept of infinity objectionable when applied to physical systems. Just because an equation seems to indicate an infinity is possible does not mean that it is true physically. This is why we both like Planck Units of space and time and consider them fundamental.

Wishing you the best of everything.

Don Limuti

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 14:39 GMT
Thank you Don,

As a response to my last essay you mentioned to have a "very good idea" when I read your essay of this contest , indeed it is opening new thinking, the duality of a personality that is created by becoming someone else is also a way of a critical mind to find new ideas.

best of luck, I rated you highly

Wilhelmus




KoGuan Leo wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 22:55 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus, Again your essay is so wonderful, I am really touched by it. We share somehow some waht similar thought. We are the seekers of the truth no matter what this truth will lead us. Here my reply to your post on my column but I just want you to know here: "Dear Wilhelmus, I read at least 5 times to make sure i understand your terms and rated highly of your fascinating essay. FQXI...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 15, 2013 @ 18:03 GMT
Leo KoGuan thank you very much for your warm reaction.

I am thinking of organising with people like you a little group to share ideas and perhaps together form a new perception of our reality, representants like you from China and Georg from Russia, i also know an emiritus professor in India etc, together we can DO something, waiting for your ideas

Wilhelmus




john stephan selye wrote on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 15:13 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I am intrigued by how you essentially describe our physics' parameters as flexible borders, centered in the Human Mind. It is refreshing to see this view expressed, not only in terms of physics (your treatment of Qubits was most intriguing), but with references to metaphysical concepts.

This shows confidence in the fact that what is at one time metaphysical becomes in time 'physical'.

I myself describe a cosmic paradigm of correlated energy vortices that includes the evolving observer - a participant in the field of reality who makes decisions at every moment, and over a very long period of time, during which his relation to the physical world - his own biological configuration, if you will - is continuously altered.

You might be interested to see how I treat this evolutionary argument as a realist interpretation of the field of reality, thus expanding the definitions of It and Bit far beyond those signified by Wheeler, and concluding that their interaction is one of continuous and simultaneous shifts - or more precisely, correlation.

I believe my perspective provides a structure you might find useful.

I have rated your essay, of course, and hope you will soon visit my page.

All the Best!

John.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 14:42 GMT
Thank you John,

I gave my reactions on your thread.

Wilhelmus




Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 06:36 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest,

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

report post as inappropriate

Sreenath B N replied on Jul. 19, 2013 @ 19:00 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thanks for your kind comments on my essay and also for rating it. I will soon go through your essay and post my comments on it and rate it too.

Regards,

Sreenath

report post as inappropriate

Sreenath B N replied on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 06:30 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Yours is the only essay I have come so far across in the essay contest that answers what Wheelar expected when he put forth the question “IT FROM BIT OR BIT FROM IT”. Because when Wheelar put forth the question he wanted the total review of our whole epistemological considerations philosophically and you have rightly grasped his intensions and accordingly treated the problem. Your discovery of the concepts Crealities and Primal Sequence have guided you in this endeavor. You have clearly stated how quantum mechanics can be explained from the neurological functions of the brain which implies mind, consciousness and sub consciousness. The problems of time and space are dealt with satisfactorily from your above considerations. Your conclusion that “REAL FREE WILL is residing not in our causal Creality of the universe but in the non-causal infinity” seems fantastic. The role played by mind and consciousness in grasping the reality in its various forms through information is simply imaginative and so is your concept of “qubit consciousness”. We both have similar approach in seeking answer to the question raised by Wheelar through the role played by mind.

As a result, I have rated your essay with maximum honors possible and wish you best of luck in the essay contest.

Sreenath

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 14:51 GMT
Dear Sreenath,

I am very glad to meet someone who is in line with my thoughts.

Of course these are only thoughts based on the knowledge that is acquired until now, and that time "until now" is only a causal recreation of a time line, so the "eternal now moment" that is the origin of its creality (creation of history), so my perceptions are now valid for me but in the future and I hope that mankind will have a long future nothing is secure, only our thoughts of today can help to improve the possible futures.

I really thank you for your rating.

Wilhelmus




Ralph Waldo Walker III wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 02:45 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Great essay. I liked the fact that you are unafraid to convey new concepts and that you are even willing to coin new terms! I think that it is going to be necessary that we do such things in order to advance our understanding of reality. We need to develop a new language of words and phrases that help us reinterpret our worldview.

Again, thank you for your contribution of new thoughts and ideas.

Best to you,

Ralph

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 15:24 GMT
Thank you Ralph, I responded already on your thread.

Wilhelmus




sridattadev kancharla wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 15:29 GMT
My dear alter ego Wilhelmus,



I give you the cosmological iSeries which spans the entire numerical spectrum from -infinity through 0 to +infinity and the simple principle underlying it is sum of any two consecutive numbers is the next number in the series. 0 is the base seed and i can be any seed between 0 and infinity. This could be the Primal Sequence you are looking...

view entire post


attachments: 6_iDNASeries.bmp

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 08:46 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

When you use formula's you lose me, I tried hard but just did not arrive to understand it.

What I do understand is your text :

"I is nothing that dwells in Everything"

You are telling here the same as I do only I formulate it like this :

The non-causal part of our consciousness (the Eternal (GOD) part if you want)

is as a singularity that is the same as ALL singularities that have the choice of ALL available pasts and futures. So essentially we are ALL the same but in our causal prison we are different because each causal part of consciousness is through its contact with its non-causal part able to experience time-life- lines that seem different but are originating in the same eternity (Total Simultaneity).

best regards

and also Love

Wilhelmus




Than Tin wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 02:29 GMT
Hello Wilhelmus

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/19
65/feynman-lecture.html)

said: “It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 08:32 GMT
Dear Than,

The "simplicity" of nature is that our reality is only ONE of the infinity available.

The dualities you are mentioning are not only represented by their extremities but also by the infinity of states in between these extremities.(see my essay). LIFE is in between birth and death, so the richness is infinite and life is the line of chosen infinite available points of "each" Eternal Now moment.(point on a Bloch sphere).

I enjoyed very much your submission

and thank you for the attention you gave to mine.

Wilhelmus




eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 20:56 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you for appreciating my essay.

If I suppose that the Universe is information. And if I also suppose that the Universe is built from simple to more complex. Which system, to choose, a simple binary, or complex decimal ?

I rated your essay.

And good luck.

Please visit My essay.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 15:10 GMT
Thank you Amazigh,

Two times "suppose",

is binary "simple" ? No it is just the possibility of two choices.

Which does not mean that other choices cannot be made.

Even decimal is only 10 choices.

I think that choices and free will are infinite.

Wilhelmus




Georgina Woodward wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 23:45 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I want to let you know that I have read your very interesting essay. I found myself in agreement with your discussion of 'Crealtity' formation, (which I have been calling Image reality) but a bit lost when you got to the primal sequence. I'm not quite sure why, in your opinion, all times should be available to the subconscious mind. (You may have explained in the essay but it has slipped my mind, as I read it some time ago).

Having said that, looking out into space there is potential sensory data that can be received from near present to light years back in time.It just depends what data is received in what order, to form the observer's 'Creality' including the subjective passage of time. But in everyday life the time span is limited by the distance of objects in the environment from the observer and so the time it takes for data to travel from source to observer. (Tell me if I'm not thinking about it in the correct way). By the way, you may find Ken Wharton's essay very interesting, I did.

Anyway an enjoyable, thought provoking essay. Good luck ,Georgina

report post as inappropriate


Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 14:46 GMT
dear Georgina,

I waited a long time for your visit, (polished the house, made tea etc) but here you are . Thanks for the rating.

Now about "sub-consciousness". I think that there is a difference between the so called sub-consciousness and the non-causal part of our consciousness. You could align them as follows :

non-causal consciousness in Total Simultaneity : has "contact",...

view entire post




Georgina Woodward replied on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 23:50 GMT
Thanks Wilhelmus,

I will need to think about it. I am torn between thinking I understand what you mean and thinking I really haven't understood you correctly.

It makes sense to me that there are far more potential life lines than the one selected. The one line selected is making that observer's past. Being able to select a different past doesn't quite make sense to me, unless I think about re-writing the story stored in the memory, selecting a better one, to account for the stored facts. But I'm also quite sure that's not what you mean.

Do you just mean that there is potential data in the environment that had the potential to be a different past? I might say the sense organs are bathed in the data pool, if I was to refer to my own explanatory framework. If so, I do understand what you are saying. However you say, Quote-" non-causal consciousness in Total Simultaneity : has "contact", this is not the good expression, it is embedded in all available pasts and futures should be a better description".Which makes me wonder, how?; and why do you propose this? Does it overcome some kind of problem or fit particularly well with some facts?

Your paragraph starting "The "observer" is its consciousness...does make perfect sense to me, as I am familiar with your concept of the subjective simultaneity sphere from last years essay.

I do like that you have separated the observer, who sees, from the causal and non causal mind. Which I think is a useful thing to consider.Some of the FQXi lectures from the Time conference brought out how the mind controls the synchronization of data and the perception of when in time stimuli have occurred. It isn't just a passive receiver.I am thinking this might be what you mean by the causal mind. The non causal mind would then be the receiver and not involved in processing into an ordered experience.

As you can see from all that I'm still a bit puzzled. Georgina

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 09:19 GMT
Dear Georgina;

About once perhaps being able to choose your history:

Indeed it is not necessary to clean up the memory you have on the life-line you are now aware of, each life line has his own history and future , you just "jump" to another one with a "better" past, the one you were on is becoming one of the infinite availabilities. You can say that when this happens you will not be...

view entire post




Georgina Woodward replied on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 22:35 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus,

thank you very much for your reply. Lots to think about.One puzzlement for now; If I hop to a different better life line does the former one erase itself from memory, (the neural systems allowing recall)?, how? Or is there awareness of the old and the new history? How does the new history that wasn't, but now is, write itself into memory? I can imagine such a thing being done artificially by implanting false memories but I can't imagine the natural process of change that accompanies the hop.

report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 17:22 GMT
Dear

I gave you rating *.



Thank you for presenting your nice essay. So you can produce matter from your thinking or from information description of that matter. . . . ?

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

I failed mainly because I worked...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 14:36 GMT
thank you Satyavarapu for your extensive answer and your positive rating.

I visited your website and you are really giving a message, although I may not be of the same opinion, I am always interested in different perceptions, it is ALL the colours together that constitute the rainbow.

best regards

Wilhelmus




Christian Corda wrote on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 15:33 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

As I told you in my Essay page, I have read your pretty Essay. Here are my comments/questions.

1) I find interesting your decomposing information as far as PB and PS and the duality between these "building blocks of reality" and the Block Universe.

2) Why did you state that each Primal Sequence has the length of a Planck-time?

3) In your statement "Our causal consciousness can be imagined as an emerged singularity from the total constitution of the materialistic created reality (Creality) of body and brain" has the word "singularity" the usual mathematical meaning?

4) I like that the duality between possible states of a single qubit and Bloch Sphere is connected with the Holographic Principle.

5) Although in your physical world there is more uncertainty than in quantum mechanics, you claim that "we may achieve a whole new form of “knowledge” that can become WISDOM". This looks a bit contradictory. Don't you think that there is also a potential negative alternative, a complete breakdown of causality that could generate a complete CHAOS?

In any case, your Essay is beautiful and I enjoyed in reading it. Thus, I will give you a high rate.

Cheers,

Ch.

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 10:19 GMT
Dear Christian,

Thank you very much for your valued attention

ref 2. I choose the Planck length because at that length there is longer before or after possible, you could regard it as the limit of causality, the same is done in string theory and Loop Quantum Gravity. However I am also aware that this can be only a limit that comes with the actual knowledge of physics. For example in...

view entire post





Héctor Daniel Gianni wrote on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 19:47 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde:

I am an old physician and I don’t know nothing of mathematics and almost nothing of physics. maybe you would be interested in my essay over a subject which after the common people, physic discipline is the one that uses more than any other, the so called “time”.

I am...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 08:26 GMT
Dear Dr Gianni,

Thank you for your extensive and interesting post.

I read your essay, and posted an answer there.

best regards

Wilhelmus




Yuri Danoyan wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 03:36 GMT
Hi Wilhelmus

Are you rated my essay?

Yuri

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 14:35 GMT
Yes Yuri already in june

Wilhelmus




Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 22:13 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-
V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

report post as inappropriate

Author Wilhelmus de Wilde replied on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 14:34 GMT
dear Paul,

The photon as a time carrier is quite a new and fascinating idea, my perception however is that also a photon is only ONE way to explain our reality through observation. The photon is both wave and "particle" and ALL in between these two extremities (I think). So it is one of the infinite possibilities to explain what we are experiencing as reality.

The reversals as you indicate are "available" at every "moment" every "eternal now" that is at the cross-point of what we experience as the past and the future, the experienced past however is only one of an infinite amount of available pasts.

best regards

and hoping for your reply

Wilhelmus




Author Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Oct. 23, 2013 @ 14:33 GMT
Just a test to see if the mail system is still active




Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'T' and 'V':


Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.