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


Previous Contests

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.
read/discusswinners

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

Jack Panamint: on 12/20/14 at 20:15pm UTC, wrote "Fallacy is due to difference between reality and information. " Not so....

Jack Panamint: on 12/20/14 at 20:10pm UTC, wrote What is an "ad hock"? Beyond spelling errors and questionable grammar, I...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 21:50pm UTC, wrote Dear Nainan, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

Antony Ryan: on 8/4/13 at 3:57am UTC, wrote FQXi have resolved the issue now

Antony Ryan: on 8/3/13 at 19:45pm UTC, wrote Dear Nainan, I've lost a lot of comments and replies on my thread and many...

Héctor Gianni: on 8/2/13 at 20:06pm UTC, wrote DearNainan K. Varghese: I am an...

basudeba mishra: on 7/28/13 at 12:15pm UTC, wrote Dear Sir, This is our post to Dr. Wiliam Mc Harris in his thread. We...

Sreenath N: on 7/26/13 at 9:59am UTC, wrote Dear Nainan, I have also rated your thought provoking essay with maximum...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "Climate has had identifiable shifting patterns over thousands and over..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

John Cox: ""Do you have the slightest conception of the size of the earth or the..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Georgina Woodward: "James, I'm sorry for getting the way you define mass wrong. It is clear to..." in Sounding the Drums to...

John Cox: "James, Now, please. Do not take umbrage. I fully accept covariance within..." in Sounding the Drums to...

ms office support: "There are many users of MS Office who use different applications of it for..." in Are We Merging With Our...

Samaira Khan: "Hi there, I enjoy reading through your article post. I like to write a..." in Retrocausality,...

Nitina oania: "http://freerobuxgenerator.net" in Quantum Replicants:...

Nitina oania: "We below at Chikara Video Game" understand exactly what it resembles to..." in Quantum Replicants:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

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.


FQXi FORUM
August 20, 2017

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: Relevance of Digital Physics by Nainan K. Varghese [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Nainan K. Varghese wrote on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 15:51 GMT
Essay Abstract

'It from bit' doctrine suggested that laws of physics can be presented in terms of information and hence, information is more fundamental to physics than reality. Reality is about existence and information is about existing objects. An object has to exist before information can be gained about it. Hence, reality is more fundamental than information. ‘It from bit’ doctrine is not much different from many other modern theories in physics, which consider human faculty above reality. All of them strive to impose human supremacy over nature.

Author Bio

Nainan K.Varghese pursues independent research in fundamental concepts of physics.

Download Essay PDF File




Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 22, 2013 @ 15:59 GMT
Mr. Varghese,

I found it so refreshing to read you very interesting essay for it was so firmly set in reality. I wholeheartedly agree with your astute statement that: Fallacy is due to difference between reality and information. I wish you all the best in the competition.

report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 22, 2013 @ 20:03 GMT
Dear Nainan

Your analysis is very well, but somewhat confusing conclusion: "Information is not substance." - Ok, so but then : "In this sense, 'it' is substance ..." What is the meaning?

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

report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 20:05 GMT
Nainan,

I truly appreciate your approach and analogy of the current situation physics finds itself in today. Our reliance on information is compromised by how such knowledge is obtained as you have masterfully pointed out. There is one thing I would have liked to see and that is your viewpoint of how existence comes into being in the first place.

I hope you will take the time to review my essay which also touched upon some of the topics in your essay. The findings as presented in my essay have led me to understand how causality unifies gravity with the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces as one super-deterministc force, see:

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1809

I have rated your entry and I wish you the best of luck,

Manuel

report post as inappropriate


Philip Gibbs wrote on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 19:58 GMT
Nainan, Although some parts of your essay are contrary to my point of view I think you are right on many things. It is very true that mathematics must be related to physical ideas before it can make sense. You cant trust a theory just because you like the maths.

I think you also used the word information 70 times which probably beats everyone else so you are certainly on topic and I found it very pleasantly worded. You deserve a better rating.

report post as inappropriate


Michael Helland wrote on Jun. 26, 2013 @ 23:45 GMT
You write that an object has to exist before there is information about it.

Is there such a thing as an object nobody has any information about?

report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 04:54 GMT
Send to all of you

THE ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AND A SMALL TEST FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT

To change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition and to demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay and to avoid duplicate questions after receiving the opinion of you , I will add a reply to you :

1 . THE...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 01:36 GMT
Dear Varghese,

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...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Nainan K. Varghese wrote on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 18:36 GMT
Thanks to all, who spared time to read and comment on the essay.

@Joe Fisher. Thanks for compliments. In your essay, you are quite right that ‘real universe only deals in absolutes’. Relative considerations have removed physics far from reality. Currently, most people (including scientists) consider relative parameters as absolute parameters.

@ Hoang cao Hai. I made an attempt to state that information is secondary to reality. If at all ‘it’ be taken as the primary entity, substance has every right to be addressed as ‘it’.

@Manuel S Morales. Thanks a lot. Subject of the essay was related to information. Therefore, reality and existence were not covered in it. If you are interested, we may communicate on that subject, privately. My address: matterdoc@gmail.com.

Frankly, most parts of your essay are beyond my understanding. Therefore, I am unable to make an intelligent and honest comment. However, I may point out that in my view, there is only one type of natural force. No need to unify gravity with strong, weak and electromagnetic forces, because they are all different manifestations of same natural force.

@ Philip Gibbs. I appreciate your kindness to spare some time to read and comment on my essay, thanks.

@Michael Helland. Thanks. Everything existed before anyone knew about them. Even today, we are finding new (to us) entities and phenomena, quite often. All of them existed before we got information on them. Consequently, I am sure that there are many objects in existence, about which we have no information.




James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:05 GMT
Nainan,

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


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jul. 13, 2013 @ 21:44 GMT
Dear Nainan,

I very much enjoyed your essay and believe our perspectives on reality are very similar. Your essay is easy to read and your logic easy to follow.

As you note, mathematical statements may be true, false, or nonsense, largely as a function of the meaning assigned to the notations.

I also agree that knowledge is inferred from sensual input and logical deduction by...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 14:02 GMT
Hello Nainan,

I enjoyed your essay but disagree that information is only about existing objects. If you wake up in the morning and look into your pocket and see 1 million dollars, that is an information. Later in the day, if you look into your pocket and see nothing that is also an information. So if something that exist stop existing that is an information. Or if something was not there and start existing that is also an information. Do you agree?

Good luck in the contest.

Best regards,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 19, 2013 @ 11:32 GMT
Dear Nainan,

You are dead right that an object has to exist before information can be gained about it. This statement, I think can not be argued with. So you go further than most in uniting most essays here. But not all essays mentioned this very simple but fundamental point! Well done! Please take a look at my essay, which shouldn't be at odds with your excellent ideas.

Best wishes,

Antony

report post as inappropriate


basudeba mishra wrote on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 01:56 GMT
Dear Sir,

We fully agree with your views. The validity of a mathematical statement rests with its logical consistency. The validity of a physical statement rests with its correspondence to reality. Mathematics explains only “how much” one quantity accumulates or reduces in an interaction involving similar or partly similar quantities and not “what”, “why”, “when”,...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 07:19 GMT
Dear Nainan,

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


Anonymous wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 02:07 GMT
Hi Nainan,

Sorry for the delay, I just noticed your response to my earlier comments of support on your essay page. I too believe in the doctrine of cause and effect which is also the basis of my essay. Although you have a different approach to causality than I do, I found your essay inspiring and most worthy of merit and have rated it accordingly.

Best wishes and good luck in the competition.

Manuel

report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 19:40 GMT
Dear Nainan,

Very nice essay. I will score you 7. But I don't agree an object has to exist before information can be gained about it. Let me give you a little puzzle to explain my idea.

"If you wake up one morning and dip your hand in your pocket and 'detect' a million dollars, then on your way back from work, you dip your hand again and find that there is nothing there…

1) Have you 'elicited' an information in the latter case?

2) If you did not 'participate' by putting your 'detector' hand in your pocket, can you 'elicit' information?

3) If the information is provided by the presence of the crisp notes ('its') you found in your pocket, can the absence of the notes, being an 'immaterial source' convey information?

Finally, leaving for the moment what the terms mean and whether or not they can be discretely expressed in the way spin information is discretely expressed, e.g. by electrons

4) Can the existence/non-existence of an 'it' be a binary choice, representable by 0 and 1?"

If you answer YES TO 1) then you will understand my point. Have you check and rated my essay?

Best regards,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 09:56 GMT
Dear Nainan,

Your brief but lucid essay is full of insightful points and makes any one to ponder over it deeply to grasp its meaning and implications. You have rightly pointed out the limitations of applying not only mathematical analysis to science but also that of digital based computational applications to grasp the facts of Nature. Misuse of the concept of information in science is clearly exposed and you have put restrictions on its usage in science. You have clearly summed up your thought in these lines “It from Bit doctrine suggested that laws of physics can be presented in terms of information and hence, information is more fundamental to physics than reality. This line of thought is not much different from many other modern theories in physics, which consider human faculty above reality. All of them strive to impose human supremacy on whole of nature. Nature and reality are treated as handouts of physical laws promulgated by humans, however outrageous and illogical these may be”. When you say that ‘Reality is absolute and ultimate objective state’, you remind me of the Indian vedantic philosophical system of Advaita. You have concluded that ‘It is substance and Bit’ is foundational matter particle from It’, thus giving primary importance to reality rather than to information and also showing the prominent role played by mind in grasping reality through information. This is also the conclusion reached by me in my essay (http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827). So, please, go through my essay and express your valuable comments on it in my thread.

Best wishes,

Sreenath

report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 09:59 GMT
Dear Nainan,

I have also rated your thought provoking essay with maximum possible honors.

Thanks,

Sreenath

report post as inappropriate


basudeba mishra wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 12:15 GMT
Dear Sir,

This is our post to Dr. Wiliam Mc Harris in his thread. We thought it may be of interest to you.

Mathematics is the science of accumulation and reduction of similars or partly similars. The former is linear and the later non-linear. Because of the high degree of interdependence and interconnectedness, it is no surprise that everything in the Universe is mostly non-linear....

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Héctor Daniel Gianni wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 20:06 GMT
DearNainan K. Varghese:

I am an old physician and I don’t know nothing of mathematics and almost nothing of physics,

But 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”. No one...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Aug. 3, 2013 @ 19:45 GMT
Dear Nainan,

I've lost a lot of comments and replies on my thread and many other threads I have commented on over the last few days. This has been a lot of work and I feel like it has been a waste of time and energy. Seems to have happened to others too - if not all.

I WILL ATTEMPT to revisit all threads to check and re-post something. Your thread was one affected by this.

I can't remember the full extent of what I said, but I have notes so know that I was going to rate it very highly, which I have now done!

Hopefully the posts will be able to be retrieved by FQXi.

Best wishes,

Antony

report post as inappropriate

Antony Ryan replied on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 03:57 GMT
FQXi have resolved the issue now

report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 21:50 GMT
Dear Nainan,

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


Jack Panamint wrote on Dec. 20, 2014 @ 20:10 GMT
What is an "ad hock"? Beyond spelling errors and questionable grammar, I think a more focused, refutable, and less ambitious article would be helpful for those of us newcomers trying to evaluate these ideas from a position outside of the debate.

report post as inappropriate

Jack Panamint replied on Dec. 20, 2014 @ 20:15 GMT
"Fallacy is due to difference between reality and information. "

Not so. Fallacies are generally identified and categorized by their internal structure, independent of reality or information. (see 'ad hoc' fallacy, 'ad hominem' fallacy, et al.)

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.