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

Stephen Ternyik: on 2/26/17 at 9:23am UTC, wrote your own; success (typos)

Stephen Ternyik: on 2/26/17 at 9:21am UTC, wrote Many thanks, Peter. The exponentiality of knowledge automation for...

Peter Jackson: on 2/25/17 at 10:25am UTC, wrote Stephen, Thanks for your comments on mine. I think a cornerstone of our...

Stephen Ternyik: on 2/21/17 at 11:11am UTC, wrote Many thanks for your observations, Peter. My research is indeed not...

Peter Jackson: on 2/20/17 at 20:45pm UTC, wrote Stephen, Great to read such an original and unique essay and viewpoint,...

Stephen Ternyik: on 2/14/17 at 12:45pm UTC, wrote Dear Yehuda ! Many thanks for your profound comments.I am in agreement with...

Yehuda Atai: on 2/14/17 at 12:07pm UTC, wrote Dear Stephen I read your essay and thanks for the observations you made;...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 2/12/17 at 22:45pm UTC, wrote You wrote an excellent essay for this intellectual beauty contest. Best...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jose Koshy: "James Putnam, What do you mean by the acceleration of light? Do you mean..." in Alternative Models of...

Jose Koshy: "Steven, Because we are not sitting face to face, I may not be replying..." in Alternative Models of...

Algernon kk: "Steve Agnew is a legend for doing that. A lot of people at online resume..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

Mohan rao: "Voot app free download Flash Recovery" in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Mohan rao: "My partner and I stumbled over here different website and thought I might..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, BTW, it is the community vote that matters ... not the public vote...." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, You statement regarding your score does not make any sense. You..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Algernon kk: "Steve Agnew is a legend for doing that. A lot of people at custom..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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)

Rescuing Reality
A "retrocausal" rewrite of physics, in which influences from the future can affect the past, could solve some quantum quandaries—saving Einstein's view of reality along the way.


FQXi FORUM
February 28, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Ma-thematical Logic, Temporal Knowledge and the Arrow of Causation by Stephen I. Ternyik [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

This essay's rating: Community = 5.0; Public = 3.0


Author Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 18, 2017 @ 21:54 GMT
Essay Abstract

The author 'reveals' his wandering towards a research goal in life and science by setting a methodical aim and intention in applied social science, mainly via identifying the hidden (undiscovered) agenda in the socio-economic mal-distribution of human living chances in our (finite) physical and ethical universe of planet earth.

Author Bio

Stephen I. Ternyik (Magister Artium Technologiae) is a self-employed economic researcher & entrepreneur, with more than 30 years of professional experience in management, investment, capital formation and monetary tools; his main scientific interest is creative writing and the design of learning events.

Download Essay PDF File




Anonymous wrote on Jan. 20, 2017 @ 16:24 GMT
Dear Researcher Ternyik,

As you will find out if you read my essay, Einstein was utterly wrong when he stupidly stated that “reality was an illusion, albeit a persistent one.”

One real visible Universe must have only one reality. Simple natural reality has nothing to do with any abstract complex musings such as the ones you effortlessly indulge in. 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 as complicated as theories of reality are.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 20, 2017 @ 16:27 GMT
I AM NOT ANONYMOUS> THE INEPT FQXi.org site has again logged me out for no reason.

I am Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 20, 2017 @ 19:17 GMT
Dear Joe Fisher ! Your essay already found my reading interest and it is among the FQXI contributions that I study with more attention, i,e. most so-called experimental claims on natural reality or real nature are indeed pure academic artifacts. Empirical evidence (e.g. progress in surgery) and hypothetical constructs (e.g. human consciousness) belong to the realm of real human life. So, my point is to make a difference between maths as applied to real problems of human life and maths as an esotheric activity. Concerning simplicity, I do think that we should try to use as simple approaches as possible to solve the mystery of nature, but complexity can only be reduced by complexity, i.e. think complex, try to say it simple (and friendly). Nature is reality (not the laboratory) and I do understand that you find your way of enlightenment by the ininite light from non-surface inspirations of real nature. Best: Stephen I. Ternyik




Stefan Weckbach wrote on Jan. 24, 2017 @ 10:38 GMT
Dear Stephen, i am glad that someone has the courage to mention the hidden/undiscovered agenda in the socio-economic mal-distribution as it gravitates towards its own collapse (and/or towards war). I also read Erich Fromm decades ago and agree with him more than ever.

report post as inappropriate


Author Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 24, 2017 @ 15:19 GMT
Great to hear back from you, dear Stefan Weckbach ! Many contemporaries are also trying to attack this human systems problem of thermo-economics; Erich Fromm pointed towards the right direction, concerning systems evolution and reform. The physics of human intention and consciousness is a future research field of science where the moral (ethical) dimension (meaning) of space and time will be clarified and corrected by applied methodical logic.



Anonymous replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 00:43 GMT
Dear Stephen,

First off, let me say that among the great thoughts that characterized Einstein's vision of the physics of nature, don't know why you chose this most unfortunate one to illustrate your writing. Einstein certainly did not think that as part of reality he was an illusion himself.

Past this little hurdle, I highly praise your essay. Your attempt to put under the same formal tent social dynamics, human economics, cognition and human teleology is quite commendable, not withstanding the scant underlying math.

Your suspicion about the hidden analytic depths of the Gaussian distribution is quite justified, and I invite you to take a look at my essay for further explanation.

Although at times there is a lack of clarity in your vision as expressed, I believe your framework of thoughts about the human endeavour as a whole is quite assertive. You sure are a notable thinker!

Good luck in this contest.

Joseph

Jean-Claude

___________________

report post as inappropriate


Joseph J. Jean-Claude wrote on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 00:46 GMT
Dear Stephen,

First off, let me say that among the great thoughts that characterized Einstein's vision of the physics of nature, don't know why you chose this most unfortunate one to illustrate your writing. Einstein certainly did not think that as part of reality he was an illusion himself.

Past this little hurdle, I highly praise your essay. Your attempt to put under the same formal tent social dynamics, human economics, cognition and human teleology is quite commendable, not withstanding the scant underlying math.

Your suspicion about the hidden analytic depths of the Gaussian distribution is quite justified, and I invite you to take a look at my essay for further explanation.

Although at times there is a lack of clarity in your vision as expressed, I believe your framework of thoughts about the human endeavour as a whole is quite assertive. You sure are a notable thinker!

Good luck in this contest.

Joseph

Jean-Claude

___________________

report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 10:32 GMT
Dear Joseph ! Your essay contains impressive research , I will study your scientific approach of cognitive physics and give my reader response. My main interest are the construction principles of social (human) reality, i.e. I do not subscribbe to the public relations teaching that reality is no-thing and perception is every-thing. The Einsteinian proverb is surely a provocation, concerning any human effort to cope with 'reality' and to develop a unified (cognitive) systems theory of human life (living). Personally, I do believe, that such a universal blueprint of reality exists and is attainable by the application of scientifc creativity, i.e. religion, philosophy and science have a humanistic commonality, with the scientific method being the most reliable tool of human communication. Best: stephen




Joseph J. Jean-Claude wrote on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 13:02 GMT
Dear Steve,

The discussed Einstein quote does not make much sense in the context of physical science. But it does in the context of the human sciences, in particular religion and philosophy. In that sense it is to be related to traditional Eastern philosophy, specifically buddhism and lamaism, which assert that our passage on earth with all its tribulations is a kharmic journey with no other purpose than purifying the soul.

As a Jew and with the personal education that he had about Eastern religions, one is left to wonder if part of that had inspired his observation.

You write however: I do not subscribe to the public relations teaching that reality is no-thing and perception is every-thing. Could not agree more.

Best.

Joseph

report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 15:14 GMT
Dear Joseph ! My understanding of the quote is that it was meant to be a provocation, not more. I have studied the family history and biography of Einstein and would evaluate the mindset as secular Jewish humanism or Judaism as a civilization; this cognitive approach to reality is definitely the opposite to Buddhism. I have already detected some important points in your essay and will respond on your site in some days.I do agree to your conclusion that the quote has to be understood in the context of human science and not physical science; I am working at the intersection of these two sets of scientific knowledge, i.e. applied social science. Best: stephen



Steve Dufourny replied on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 17:04 GMT
Hello to both of you,

I beleive that Einstein indeed was a fervent thinker in God.The faith in this infinite entropy above our understanding.He was jew and the faith is improtant for jews.I am not jew but I consider God the chief orchestra of all things.The universal love after all is the only one truth in a pure altruism and universalism.Humanity and lifes are like a rainbow ,a diversity...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 18:35 GMT
The real meanings of informations of evolution by sortings, synchros,and superimposings take all their meanings.If we consider this gravitational aether instead of a luminifierous einsteinian aether,we see that informations are not only photonic but are in fact gravitational,that is why I beleive even that a photon in fact is a spheron coded,see that this gravitation balances this thermo heat and electromagntic forces of our sstandard model.Like if this zero absolute correlated with this gravitation permitted to photons to be what they must become.The informations so become complex and if we correlate with binar informations,that could converge if the quantum computing converges with the rotating 3D spherical volumes....The motions and mechanics are purely newtonian.That is why I beleive that modified newtonian mechanics MOND and this and that trying to explain this problem of rotations of galaxies without dark matter is a big error forgetting this zero absolute.I prefer the logic of Zwicky inserting this matter not baryonic for dark matter.A big puzzle in all case.

report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 22:45 GMT
You wrote an excellent essay for this intellectual beauty contest. Best wishes to you…

Your essay went into economics and Physics and biology…

I request you also have look at my essay on Dynamic Universe model and give your esteemed opinion….

report post as inappropriate


Yehuda Atai wrote on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 12:07 GMT
Dear Stephen

I read your essay and thanks for the observations you made; though I see time not moving from past through the present into the future but as the rate of change between two or more existents. The occurrence of a phenomenon in space is not due to a causale process. Reality is possible and not predetermined or necessary. i.e.causality is a special case in the occurrence of the phenomenon. the essay does not explains the sustainability of the self organization through its continuous change. there are millions of life forms that do not exists in our time and millions new ones that are formed and I don't think we have to bring G_D to their formation., the space full of infinite relations intrinsically posses the possibilities in the attributes of the movements.

thanks

yehuda atai

report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 12:45 GMT
Dear Yehuda ! Many thanks for your profound comments.I am in agreement with your statement that time is a human convention to distinguish the change of existents.The sustainability of self-organization by perpetual change, i.e. the interplay of matter and energy or space and motion, is due to dynamic efficiency or the optimization of a living systems energy transduction. If these events follow a random pattern or the workings of a creative upper force is indeed undecided. I am trying to bridge human (economic) systems and physical (natural) laws, in terms of cosmic principles. In the next 20 years, exponential knowledge automation will be an exciting field to study the organization principles of autopoeitic systems sustainability. Best wishes: stephen




Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 20:45 GMT
Stephen,

Great to read such an original and unique essay and viewpoint, well written too. It also helped that I agreed most you wrote, though that isn't supposed to be a scoring criteria! Very refreshing and worth a higher score that it has. I also don't think brevity is an encumbance when the content is well packaged and valuable.

I hope you may read, follow and comment on my own.

Best of luck in the contest.

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Feb. 21, 2017 @ 11:11 GMT
Many thanks for your observations, Peter. My research is indeed not prosaic, but guided by poetic consciousness that tries to get into the probability jackpot of human living chances. Best: stephen



Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 25, 2017 @ 10:25 GMT
Stephen,

Thanks for your comments on mine.

I think a cornerstone of our agreement is the priority of mindful understanding over mindless computation. I quoted John Wheelers full statement "always work out and know the answer before you do the maths". Your equivalent was;

"the Gaussian dictum to 1st understand (learn) the underlying mathematical idea and to 2nd train (do) the formal application is a prerequisite of all creative methodical discovery in life and science.

Seemingly you didn't connect with the classical derivation of QM in mine. I'd estimated empirically that less than 15% would, as few really understand QM and its roots, and most that do are then fully indoctrinated with it; that is it's patterns are embedded in their neural networks so anything inconsistent' is rejected a priori.(so proving the 2nd hypothesis which you agreed).

Seems I may also have been correct estimating less than 5%! Much work needed.

But thank you for yours, and reading/ commenting on mine. I feel your own total deserves to be higher so I shall wave my quantum wand now! (I hope you'll also appropriately score mine if not yet done)

Very best

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Feb. 26, 2017 @ 09:21 GMT
Many thanks, Peter. The exponentiality of knowledge automation for manufacturing, finance and medicine (in the next 20 years) will be a good testing field for the physics of human consciousness, following the working assumption of the John Wheeler quote. Meaningful work & fulfilling labor will require a full economic and humanistic redefinition, and a natural science of the human mind can be of great help to find workable answers by methodical intuition and anticipation ('the great synaptic challenge'). All the best for own work & succes: stephen




Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'L' and 'N':


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