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 Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

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

Lee Bloomquist: on 4/24/17 at 15:17pm UTC, wrote Applying G. 't Hooft's Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum...

Lee Bloomquist: on 4/22/17 at 11:49am UTC, wrote ADDENDUM— It's been said that writing is learning. Hemingway re-wrote...

Lee Bloomquist: on 4/9/17 at 12:07pm UTC, wrote "I think that your idea is to look for equations that might reveal an...

Bayarsaikhan Choisuren: on 4/8/17 at 7:32am UTC, wrote Dear Bloomquest, I enjoyed your essay. Very good idea and logic is...

Lee Bloomquist: on 3/22/17 at 2:10am UTC, wrote Fyi-- Here's a link to some other comments in the...

Lee Bloomquist: on 3/20/17 at 10:27am UTC, wrote Thank you Rick. "Being is thinking and being." -Parmenides

Rick Searle: on 3/20/17 at 0:14am UTC, wrote Hello Lee, I enjoyed your essay. In a way it brings things full circle...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 3/18/17 at 9:22am UTC, wrote Thank you sir, I saw that essay. It was good and nicely discussed about...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Rajiv Singh: "Hi Lorraine, This time, before submitting, I noted that the web page did..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Anonymous: "Dear Lorraine, Thank you, not only for your responses, but also for a..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

sussan betcher: "Such ventures helping to raise public awareness and interest in theoretical..." in Multiversal Journeys —...

sabir rao: "We are looking for the ways how to hack instagram password online and..." in Purifying Physics: The...

sabir rao: "If you don't know a little bit about the free psn plus codes then here is..." in Towards a Goal — Two...

Anonymous: "From the perspective of field theory, the only difference that arises..." in Rescuing Reality

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Community, I could probably have done something better but it gets the..." in Alternative Models of...

appzoro Technologies : "Informative post and all threads. I am new here and wants to share me..." in New Podcast: A MICROSCOPE...


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
April 29, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Choice Driven by Fear Is Universal, Consciousness Rare by Lee Bloomquist [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Lee Bloomquist wrote on Jan. 10, 2017 @ 21:50 GMT
Essay Abstract

This is a toy model of dark energy.

Author Bio

Lee Bloomquist is a retired Engineer, who also worked as an industrial researcher. He learned of the theory of information in this paper (Jon Barwise's informationalism) from organizing a workshop at Stanford's Center for the Study of Language and Information with Keith Devlin and Ted Goranson: The...

view entire post





Gary D. Simpson wrote on Jan. 12, 2017 @ 15:58 GMT
Lee,

Many thanks for an interesting read. I had to study it a little while to understand your nomenclature but it is worthwhile.

Your essay seems to argue that an object has a physical property that allows it to predict the future! To some, this might seem impossible, but to me, this seems very possible. You might find my essay to be interesting in this regard. I will combine your...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Lee Bloomquist replied on Jan. 13, 2017 @ 03:08 GMT
Thanks Gary. Looks like you are interested in the Division Algebras. They are fascinating. Division let's you say things about "possibility." If that interests you, there's something about it in the first section of a paper you can download here. I wonder what it would mean for the wave functions you are studying.



Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 14, 2017 @ 16:59 GMT
Dear Mr. Bloomquist,

All visible objects have a real surface. As I have thoughtfully pointed out in my brilliant essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY, the real Universe consists only of one unified visible infinite surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light. Reality am NOT guesswork.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Author Lee Bloomquist replied on Jan. 15, 2017 @ 01:56 GMT
Thanks for commenting, Joe. Reminds me of-- "Darkness sees no light and light sees no darkness."




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 9, 2017 @ 00:59 GMT
Very nice essay Bloomquest,

Very good idea and logic is good. Probably you need to make some corrections in your essay. In page 7 last para and in page 8 first and second para… You mentioned dark energy and Blackhole. These concepts not required. They are not even required in large scale universe also. Physics at large scales can be explained without these in a much better way. Probably...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Lee Bloomquist wrote on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 02:41 GMT
Thanks for commenting!

More generally the idea is to look for equations that might reveal an information channel between different parts of the same system (as when using certain maths, the Born rule can be used to construct an information channel between the nonStandardFuture and the nonStandardPast).

As another example, the equation defining proper time in terms of coordinate time...

view entire post




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 09:22 GMT
Thank you sir,

I saw that essay. It was good and nicely discussed about nicely. your words......." However, despite a great deal of evidence for the validity of this correspondence, we do not have a deep understanding of why or how spacetime/gravity emerges from the degrees of freedom of the field theory. In this essay, we will argue, based on widely accepted examples of gauge theory /...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Member George F. R. Ellis wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 07:07 GMT
Dear Lee

this is a very interesting essay. I very much like the breadth of vision. And I agree very much about Feynman and wandering.

Two specific issues. First, your concept of the origin of dark energy may relate to a very interesting paper by Thibaut Josset, Alejandro Perez, Daniel Sudarsky: arXiv:1604.04183.

Second, Probability Learning is crucial to life: it is...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Lee Bloomquist wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 23:53 GMT
Professor Ellis,

First I must express my sincere respect. You have been recognized by Nelson Mandela for your opposition to apartheid. Perhaps of related interest, I have recently watched the video of a speaker in Soweto say that now South Africa has the chance to light, and lead, the world in peace.

Second, your essay demonstrates the logical equations of physics and then the...

view entire post





Author Lee Bloomquist wrote on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 01:07 GMT
This is an Extended Abstract of the essay.

This is a toy model of dark energy. The original motivation for building this model was to report to physicists the finding of a new mathematical object I called the Born infomorphism, a transmission of information from the nonstandard future into the nonstandard past involving the Born rule and a nonstandard model of time. Guidelines from the essay contest— to which this essay is submitted— have given the model its present form.

New methods introduced by Jon Barwise (e.g. Information and Impossibilities), Samson Abramsky (his paper and his presentation on Big Toy Models) and others (e.g. Jerry Seligman, Information Flow, Lawrence Moss, Vicious Circles) have been applied to the architecture. Specifically, a co-algebra called a stream is built within a Chu space, which is then placed inside the monad (as in nonstandard analysis) that is nonstandard time. Which monad, called clockTime, then becomes the output of another stream, properTime. In previous work, this stream is "zippered" together (a technique for combining streams which are modeled by non-wellfounded sets) with David Bohm's Holomovement. Inside this architecture, the essay presents a new mathematical expression for the collapse of the wave function. This new mathematics for the collapse of the wave function seems, perhaps arguably, like the simplest possible to imagine. Collapse of the wave function seems to look like the diagram which is expressed in the text as a table.

Taking the idea from Bohm and Hiley in The Undivided Universe— that the two sides of the simplest equation for the Born rule are from two different processes— the model applies a different algorithm for each side of the equation. These are a pair of algorithms from mathematical game theory-- from the mathematical game called probability learning. In this context, the signature of a learning algorithm becomes evident. What is it learning? The laws of physics. Since it doesn't know the laws of physics, the particle must learn the laws of physics. And so it seems logical that instead of being an object, the particle in this architecture is a process (in fact, a stream). Which in previous work on the model is used to "complete" quantum mechanics, by complementing the Schrödinger equation with a co-algebra that is a stream.

All of which, in this essay, models dark energy as the waste stream from the above mathematical game, now seen as a thermodynamic engine. Forces between particles are in this model entropic.

For context, the mathematics which Feynman used in his famous lectures to talk about the goal of least action is "mindless" insofar as there is no decision process modeled in that mathematics, i.e. in the mathematics Feynman used there is no explicitly modeled process by which a player with intentions selects among possibilities to achieve the goal of least action. Here, the model begins with Abramsky's paper, in which at least the "possibilities" are made explicit. In the new mathematical model for wave function collapse, the mathematical model of such a decision process becomes explicit. So in this architecture, the decision process by which a choice is made among possibilities in order to achieve a goal is universal— from the Born infomorphism on up.

Which leads to a testable hypothesis— The Dream Child Hypothesis. In previous work on this model, the non-wellfounded set "self = (self)" was modeled by Petri nets, which are, again, a co-algebra. To make this Petri net model work, a feedback loop is needed. In the case of animals, such a feedback loop may involve either enteroceptors or proprioceptors. The former are involved in the heartbeat and the latter are involved in the breath. The Dream Child Hypothesis holds that "self=(self)" begins, not when the feedback loop is closed by enteroceptors, but when the feedback loop is closed by proprioceptors. Neuro-imaging with laboratory animals should be able to test the hypothesis.




Richard J Benish wrote on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 23:48 GMT
Dr. Bloomquist,

I enjoyed your thought-provoking essay which attaches human emotions to particles and stars:

"The toy model says we are all the same in the Universe: star- dust, stars, particles, human beings— all are driven by unconscious fear of some kind. And for human beings in the current world situation— this is a problem. Many important choices seem to be largely based on...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Lee Bloomquist replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 02:04 GMT
Richard, Thank you so much for commenting. There are a lot of interesting essays in this contest-- including yours. And, it's clear to me that you are enjoying your work! I hope that some gifted experimentalists get interested. Very Best Regards, Lee




Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Mar. 17, 2017 @ 23:11 GMT
Dear Lee Bloomquist

I inform all the participants that use the electronic translator, therefore, my essay is written badly. I participate in the contest to familiarize English-speaking scientists with New Cartesian Physic, the basis of which the principle of identity of space and matter. Combining space and matter into a single essence, the New Cartesian Physic is able to integrate modern...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Lee Bloomquist replied on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 00:25 GMT
Thank you Dizhechko Boris,

"self = (thinking, self)"




Member Rick Searle wrote on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 00:14 GMT
Hello Lee,

I enjoyed your essay. In a way it brings things full circle from my own more literary take. Science began by taking mind out of matter, but if you're right, will conclude by having brought it back in.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2817

Best of luck,

Rick Searle

report post as inappropriate

Author Lee Bloomquist replied on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 10:27 GMT
Thank you Rick.

"Being is thinking and being." -Parmenides




Author Lee Bloomquist wrote on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 02:10 GMT
Fyi-- Here's a link to some other comments in the contest.




Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren wrote on Apr. 8, 2017 @ 07:32 GMT
Dear Bloomquest,

I enjoyed your essay.

Very good idea and logic is good. I think that your idea is to look for equations that might reveal an information channel.

And also I like this phrase that

“This is a toy model of dark energy. The original motivation for building this model was to report to physicists the finding of a new mathematical object I called the Born infomorphism, a transmission of information from the nonstandard future into the nonstandard past involving the Born rule and a nonstandard model of time…”

With Best Regards,

Ch.Bayarsaikhan

report post as inappropriate

Author Lee Bloomquist replied on Apr. 9, 2017 @ 12:07 GMT
"I think that your idea is to look for equations that might reveal an information channel."

Dear Ch.Bayarsaikhan,

Thank you for your comment!

Yes, it does seem to me that the equation for the Born rule in David Bohm's book on Quantum Theory and the equation defining proper time in terms of coordinate time— both— support "local logic" for respective infomorphisms: the former involving an information channel from the nonStandard future into the nonStandard past, the latter an information channel from this process into a locally flat piece of spacetime and therefore into a local quantum field, the slight curvature between such local fields then being the result of escaped hidden energy from this process. It would be like a "thermodynamic Computer Automaton"— as in this video about the CA Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics by G. 't Hooft. But instead of linking a CA to each location of space as 't Hooft describes, I would see a "thermodynamic CA" in each of these particle-related processes.

Then the particle-as-object is like the continuous flow that we see in a motion picture comprising discrete image frames. Everything we physically perceive is technically the past like this, not the present. Because it takes time for the brain to assemble and process the incoming information from the discrete frames. So all of our intuition is based on this image of the past, which we think of as the present. Hence discrete images from the thermodynamic CA create an image recorded in the past of a continuously existing object— which we perceive as the classical, continuously existing "particle." The wave nature exists as a field of possibilities in the future, which we perceive only through our mathematical imagination, and not our physical perception as we do the past. In this way the "thermodynamic CA" is both wave and particle.

Granted, using the "hidden" character of this energy as it must be in order to support the game required, in terms of mathematical game theory, may be a stretch. But I suspect that we are approaching the limit of our ability to understand the Universe, and at this limit, the mathematical methods become sparse. This is my justification for saying that because this energy must be hidden for the mathematical game to work— therefore it must be "dark" in terms of the current mathematical methods.

Very Best Regards!

L




Author Lee Bloomquist wrote on Apr. 22, 2017 @ 11:49 GMT
ADDENDUM—

It's been said that writing is learning. Hemingway re-wrote one of his endings 47 times and according to this idea, he was simply learning what he wanted to say. For me writing this essay has been learning about the Born infomorphism and the associated proper time for the individual particle. Then after writing the essay, writing comments has been learning about N particles. Specifically I have been learning about this question:

If there's a Born infomorphism for N particles, what physically specifies the worldline of the associated proper time?

In the Schrödinger equation for N particles, there is just one time for the system of N particles and not multiple proper times, one for each particle. Then— is this one time in the Schrödinger equation the proper time for the system of N particles— is it the proper time for the system of N particles, which holds the Born infomorphism for the system? For support I look to Richard Feynman:

In Space-Time Approach to Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics, Richard Feynman wrote, "The formulation is mathematically equivalent to the more usual formulations. There are, therefore, no fundamentally new results…The total contribution from all paths reaching x, t from the past is the wave function Ψ(x,t). This is shown to satisfy Schroedinger's equation."

Rather than finding something like "1+2 = 3 is the same as 2+1=3," Feynman seems to have discovered, here, an "information channel" from the entangled system of N particles to the their quantum fields as represented by a Feynman diagram of the N particles. But Feynman didn't use mathematics to describe the information channel he'd discovered— instead he used natural language, as above.

In this essay, I used some mathematics to describe an information channel. To show that an information channel exists, I first have to show that an infomorphism exists. Which means showing there are two functions or arrows pointing in opposite directions, with heads connected to tails by each pointing to a respective situation, each situation supporting infons or elements of information from which the respective function or arrow originates— altogether meaning that the information supported in the one situation is connected by these arrows to the information supported in the other situation. The arrows take you back and forth in a closed circuit to the same information, with two equivalent translations. (Please see the diagram attached to this comment.)

So from the proper time of the system of N entangled particles specified by the Schrödinger equation, there is an arrow to the SET (I must emphasize) of possible coordinate time frames in spacetime, where for each coordinate time frame, the usual defining equation of proper time holds.

To get the above function describing an infomorphism, an arrow must go from the proper time of the entangled system to the SET of possible coordinate time frames.

Because in the other direction, there is the arrow from spacetime to the wave function of the entangled system.

Because (recalling what I learned in the essay) the entangled wave function includes not only possibilities in space but also possibilities in spin (etc.).

Space is just a "part" of these possibilities.

In "part of" relations, there is a function mapping each part to the system of which it is a part.

Which determines the direction of the arrow between the two kinds situations in the infomorphism.

To get a function going in the opposite direction, as required to identify an informorphism, there must also be a function from the proper time of the entangled system of N particles to the SET of possible coordinate time frames in spacetime.

Then to obtain Bohr's correspondence principle, which ultimately enabled Newton to have calculated using centers of mass (which don't exist in relativity), the worldline associated with proper time of the entangled system must be attached to the Fokker-Pryce center of inertia. About which, Pryce wrote, "Of these only one is independent of the frame in which it is defined. It suffers from the disadvantage that its components do not commute (in classical mechanics, do not have zero Poisson brackets), and are therefore unsuitable as generalized co-ordinates in mechanics."

Which "unsuitability" seems compatible with the idea of space emerging or depending upon entangled possibilities— and not the other way around.

attachments: 1_infomorphism.png




Author Lee Bloomquist wrote on Apr. 24, 2017 @ 15:17 GMT
Applying G. 't Hooft's Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

First I assume it can be inferred from 't Hooft's paper (above) that algorithms may underlie Hilbert Space.

Then for an algorithm implementing a stream, there would exist in the mathematical models two functions:

(1) a function from the stream to a set of types, which would be the possible types of an element of the stream.

For example—

aStream = (elementOfSomeType, aStream)

which produces the stream of elements:

elementOfSomeType_1, elementOfSomeType_2, elementOfSomeType_3 and so on

Which requires a function from aStream for example, to the set--

{type_a, type_b, type_c}

Where an element produced by the aStream could, then, be any of the three types— type_a, type_b, or type_c— as specified by the above set.

(2) As well— for each cycle of aStream— a function from the specific cycle to the actual element produced in that cycle. For example:

aStreamInCycle1 -> anElementOfType_a

aStreamInCycle2 -> anElementOfType_c

aStreamInCycle3 -> anElementOfType_b

and so on.

Then if we see these functions in the mathematical model, by the assumed inference from 't Hooft's work on Cellular Automata, we can infer that an algorithm exists— in this case, an algorithm that generates a stream.

In the ADDENDUM (previous post here), "the Feynman infomorphism" exists (to give it a name). Which requires the existence of a function from proper time of the entangled system of particles to the SET of possible coordinate time frames that support the usual formula for defining proper time, applied to this proper time.

This set is then like the above set used to define the types of aStream.

And in that case, we are just one step away from finding an algorithm— which from the assumed inference based on 't Hooft, would underlie Hilbert space.

The next step:

Find the second function, as above, which maps each cycle of the stream to an actual instance of type specified in the set.

(In the essay, this is apparent in the Born infomorphism for the 3-valued Chu space suggested by Abramsky.)

More later.




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.