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

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 4/7/17 at 11:22am UTC, wrote Dear Lorraine, Many thanks for your encouraging comment in support of my...

Lorraine Ford: on 4/7/17 at 11:07am UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir, Thanks for another impressive essay. I strongly agree...

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 4/6/17 at 10:42am UTC, wrote Dear Christian, Thank you very much for your encouraging comment and...

Christian Corda: on 4/6/17 at 9:41am UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir, Once again, you released a remarkable contribution in FQXi...

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 4/5/17 at 11:22am UTC, wrote Yes, George, fairy tales should be read more often, especially carefully...

George Kirakosyan: on 4/5/17 at 5:47am UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir (on your post in my page) I will answer simply as your...

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 4/2/17 at 11:31am UTC, wrote Dear Gavin, Many thanks for your comment and understanding of my...

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 4/2/17 at 10:43am UTC, wrote Dear Basudeba, Thank you very much for your wonderful comment. I suppose...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Dear Lorraine, No visible finite “Multi-cellular organisms have ever..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Lorraine, No visible finite “Multi-cellular organisms have ever..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

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:...

Georgina Woodward: "Hi John, I don't know what you just said but it sounds a lot more..." in Sounding the Drums to...

John Cox: "Georgi, I would say that designing an 'interface'; from a nexus of..." in Sounding the Drums to...


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 18, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Goal → New Heuristic Model of Ideality: Logos → Coincidentia Oppositorum → Primordial Generating Structure by Vladimir I. Rogozhin [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Feb. 7, 2017 @ 21:43 GMT
Essay Abstract

Fundamental knowledge endures deep conceptual crisis manifested in total crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation, loss of certainty, troubles with physics, crisis of methodology. Crisis of understanding in fundamental science generates deep crisis of understanding in global society. What way should we choose for overcoming total crisis of understanding in fundamental science? It should be the way of metaphysical construction of new comprehensive model of ideality on the basis of the modified ontology. Result of quarter-century wanderings: sum of ideas, concepts and eidoses, new understanding of space, time, consciousness.

Author Bio

Independent researcher since 1989: ontology, philosophy of physics and mathematics, philosophy of consciousness, member of XX World Congress of Philosophy (Boston, 1998), I-IV Russian Philosophical Congress (1997-2005), The First Conference "Philosophy of Physics: actual problems"(2010), The Third Russian Conference "Philosophy of Mathematics: actual problems" (2013), International Congress "Fundamental Problems of Natural Science and Technology"(2016).

Download Essay PDF File




George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 06:41 GMT
Dear Vladimir

I welcome your article as a professional and serious work. For me personally, it is very important that you are well aware of the global crisis of our time, which seems to almost in all spheres of human activity. Well I try to understand the deep meaning of your work to evaluate it by its significance.

Best wishes

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 10:59 GMT
Dear George!

Thank you for your comment. I also congratulate you on the participation in the Contest and the first high evaluation. I began to read your essay and see your deep critical look at all the "trouble with physics." I think that the competition helps sharpen all of the most acute problems in the fundamental science and society.

Good luck in the Сontest!

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir



Joe Fisher replied on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 16:37 GMT
Dear Dr. Rogozhan,

Please excuse me for I do not wish to be too critical of your fine essay and I do hope that it fairs well in the competition.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

One real visible Universe must have only one reality. Simple natural reality has nothing to do with any abstract complex musings about imaginary invisible “metaphysical construction of new comprehensive model of ideality on the basis of the modified ontology.”

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 19:42 GMT
Dear Joe,

Thank you for your comments and observations. I fully agree that the principle simplicity is one of the basic principles of Nature. The dialectical principle of triunity (super principle) brings together all the principles of the ontological basis of Nature. I will read your essay in a short time. Sincerely, Vladimir




Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 16:14 GMT
Dear, Mr. Rogozhin

We can not see the world as whole.But we can see the relationship between the whole and the parts.

Regards,

Branko

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 16:51 GMT
Dear Branko,

If we plant the grape seeds in the ground and irrigate with water, then we will see the grapevine and grapes. Then we make a good wine, gather friends together and see all the living world as whole. Constructive metaphysics of process + Music + Poetry helps to see the world as whole. Many thanks!

Vladimir



Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 15:28 GMT
Grape seed, which Bulat Okudzhava buries into the warm soil gives an insight into the nature of physical constants, time, meaning, aspiration of being of the Universe to the "LifeWorld "(Husserl)

«I will bury a grape seed into the warm soil,

And will kiss the vine, and pluck the ripe bunches.

And will gather my friends, attune my heart to love,

Otherwise, why do I live on this unchanging earth?



Gather on, my guests, to my feast,

Tell me straight to my face who am I known to be among you.

King of Heaven will forgive me my sins.

Otherwise, why do I live on this unchanging earth?



In her dark-red my Dali 1 will be singing for me,

In my black-and-white I will bow my head before her,

I will listen, captivated, and will die of love and sorrow,

Otherwise, why do I live on this eternal earth?



And when the sunset will swirl, drifting about the corners,

Let the visions float by me time and again:

Blue buffalo, and white eagle, and golden trout,

Otherwise, why do I live on this unchanging earth?» (Bulat Okudzhava)




Patrick Tonin wrote on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 18:58 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thank you for your comments on my essay.

I found your essay very well researched and informative. Maybe you could have added a bit more of your personal view on the subject.

All the best,

Patrick

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 19:30 GMT
Dear Patrick,

Thank you for your comments and suggestions. You'll notice that the last two chapters of my essay - entirely my ideaы. Main of them is fully original - ontological construction of the primordial generating structure.

Sincerely, Vladimir




Hans van Leunen wrote on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 15:50 GMT
Dear Dr. Rogozhan,

Thank you for your comments and your interesting paper.

I scanned your paper. I am a physicist and not a philosopher. For every sentence that a philosopher writes, I need to read a book to understand what he is stating. I like to have my models very simple. Only in that condition, I can comprehend and apply these models.

I am convinced that something created...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 16:28 GMT
Dear Hans,

Thanks for reading my essay and deep explanatory comment. Our philosophies are very close in spirit and orientation, so your conclusions are clear to me. Especially your ideas, which I noted in the previous comments on your blog. I construct my model based on a modern interpretation of the ontological "celestial triangle" (Plato), one axiom, a principle of ontological and dialectical unification of matter at all levels of the Universum existence. This is the extreme simplicity (Occam's razor the sharpest), taking into account existing knowledge and traditions. if possible, vote my essay.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 13, 2017 @ 23:37 GMT
Nice Philosophical essay sir…

Your words in page 7 and 8….

“2. Method of ontological constructing of a symbol-attractor of the primordial generating process of the Universum being as a whole. The total unification of matter at all levels of the Universum.

3. Basification of mathematics (knowledge) is the ontological construction of intrinsic framework, carcass and foundation, and representation in basic (ontological) mathematical symbol.” … are really correct. Universe is singleone

Have a look at my essay also…

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 09:18 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

Thanks so much for your important comment. You have noted the main thing - the problem basification of mathematics, and hence knowledge as a whole. Today, the foundations of science from the "granite", it is necessary to make it more robust - to transform the "granite" in the "basalt"… The world picture of physicists and poets should be united and filled with the senses of the "LifeWorld" (E.Husserl).

I read your essay in the near future.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir



Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 10:29 GMT
I read your essay «Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe» and remember Rabindranath Tagore, taking into account the idea of the unity of knowledge, my concept of the ontological (structural, space) of memory, Raj Kapoor's song '50s, which is very loved in Russia, and the theme of the contest:

«Tired in my way I asked the destiny:

“Who pushes me in my back so ruthlessly?” -

“Look back!” - I look - and the complaint ceases:

It is my past who pushes me forward.»

I wish you good luck!

All the Best,

Vladimir



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 23:16 GMT
Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

A

Thank you very much for such a moral support. I went to the link you mentioned above http://homepages.xnet.co.nz/~hardy/cosmologystatement.html . Though it was a old petition it is exactly correct even today. No research is supported even morally which is against Bigbang. Forget about the funding. I also tried to sign it, but it is going...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 20:43 GMT
Vladimir,

At first read it was great, well done. I found no concept or argument I could disagree with. I must say your use of language and 'holistic' style defeated speed reading though did convey the 'four centuries of wanderings'.

The problem remains; how do we overcome the problem! Flawed theory seems ever more deeply entrenched and our systems mean most editors and senior academics have negative motivation to change to allow advancement.

I offer one idea in terms of 'self evolution' of thinking methodology which I hope you may comment on.

I'll try to get back to yours to penetrate more deeply later.

Well done.

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 20:58 GMT
Dear Peter,

Thank you for your insightful and inspiring comment. I began to read your essay.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir



Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 16, 2017 @ 11:42 GMT
Vladimir

Glad you were inspired. My 2nd reading was easier, founded on the neural path laid by the first. I found some inspiration myself in the likes of;

'The physics of particles informs us, strictly speaking, on fundamental structures of the nature, but not on fundamental particles.'

Which agrees with my identification of Maxwells 2nd momenta missed by Heisenberg. And;

'Real progress will consist in very serious fight of science with religion which will end with their integration'

Thank you. I hope you do well in the contest and avoid the trolls still relying on the primeval thinking mode (I've exposed 2 so far).

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 16, 2017 @ 12:11 GMT
Thank you very much, Peter, for kind comment and appreciation of my ideas and concepts. Today our ideas must be as crazy to build a seamless unified basis of fundamental science. I believe that fundamental science takes the maximum responsibility for the modern existential crisis. Vector our consciousness has to make a sharp turn to the life world.

Success in the contest!

With respect, Vladimir




Alexander M. Ilyanok wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 15:55 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

As Abraham Lincoln said, "You can mislead some people permanently or for a while all the people, but you cannot fool all the people all the time ..."

I fully agree with your conclusions in essay

If we consider that it is the metaphysics shape public opinion through the media it is a real danger that an adequate conception of science, its methods and ways of existence in the public mind will be replaced by substitute of abnormal knowledge.

As stated by well-known philosopher of science Karl Popper, modern physics is characterized by crisis of understanding, the occurrence of which is related to: a) the penetration of subjectivism in physics; b) with the conviction that the quantum theory contains the complete and final truth.

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 18:51 GMT
Alexander and Tatiana,

Thank you for your comment and evaluation of my ideas. I believe that overcoming the crisis of understanding in basic science is possible only if the perceived support of various gnoseological paradigms. This crisis is a metaphysical crisis in its deepest essence, crisis knowledge foundations. Appropriate to recall here: «An educated people without a metaphysics is like a richly decorated temple without a holy of holies.» (G.W.F.Hegel)

Today, to select a right course is not only for fundamental science, and we need to understand ourselves ("hard problem of consciousness") and understand the Sun language, the language of the Cosmos (super hard problem of foundations of mathematics and knowledge in general).

Good luck!

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir




Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 22:44 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thank you for your gracious remarks on my page.

You begin,"But how can we see the world in integrality, the world as whole?" and note that the ontological meta-paradigm, Universum as a whole, has been pushed into "philosophical backyards" of science. I agree that "the physics of particles informs us, strictly speaking, on fundamental structures of the nature, but not on fundamental particles." Yes, the 'particles' are much more abstract than 50 years ago. This is extremely well stated and agrees with my observation that physicists have projected mathematical structures onto reality. Of course the great scientists were religious. They were not one-dimensional, merely focused on 'points' as convenient simplifying concepts, that facilitated applications of set theory, etc. This is probably as far away as one can get from the "The Self-Aware Universe".

I always enjoy your essays, focused on the reality of consciousness versus the artifice of interpreting symbolic structures as reality.

My best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 10:22 GMT
Dear Edwin,

Thanks so much for your comment. I believe that in fundamental science (physics, mathematics, cosmology) have to work at the same time at least three paradigms: 1. A generalizing meta-paradigm: ontological (metaphysical) paradigm - "the world as a whole"; 2. Plus competing phenomenological (parametric) paradigms.

So, for each level of existence of the Universe. Physics "rested" against the nature of the fundamental constants, the nature of the "laws of nature", structure of space, the nature of time, information, consciousness. This is the metaphysical (ontological) problem, basification (justification) of knowledge. This problem can be solved only by a new metaphysics ("modified ontology"). The crisis of understanding is not only in basic science but also in philosophy.

Physicists, mathematicians and philosophers must now work together to "dig" deep the base of knowledge (framework, carcass, foundation). I think that here it is necessary to recall Hegel's philosophical metaphor: "An educated people without a metaphysics is like a richly decorated temple without a holy of holies." It just gives direction to solve the problem of construction the "The Self-Aware Universe".

Good luck in the Contest!

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir




Alexey/Lev Burov wrote on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 01:21 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

It is nice to see you in the fqxi contest again!

I share with you your concerns about the state of fundamental science; however, I am not sure that I would accept all your recipes to resolve the crisis. For instance, the idea of an “Ontological standard” sounds a bit scary for me, reminiscent of totalitarian schemes. You write, “What way should we choose for overcoming total crisis of understanding in fundamental science? It should be the way of metaphysical construction of new comprehensive model of ideality on the basis of the "modified ontology".” What could be a criterion of truth for such “models of ideality”? In general, I like your text for the bold questioning and anticipations, surrounded by very interesting citations. I am giving you one of my high scores.

Cheers,

Alexey Burov.

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 19:11 GMT
Dear Alexey,

I am also glad to see your essay in this contest!

Thank you very much for your comment. Today, physicists introduce hypotheses without philosophical foundation. These hypotheses can not be verified experimentally. In particular, the hypothesis of a "big bang", which has quite a lot of opponents . Therefore, to overcome the "crisis of understanding, "crisis of interpretation and representation ", "trouble with physics" required ontological standard of basification (justification) on the basis of ontology ("modified ontology"), which establishes the common basis of knowledge (ontological framework, carcass, foundation) uniform for all levels of existence of the Universum. Here the key idea - the total dialectical ontological unification of the matter along the "vertical" of being. The criterion of truth for the new model of ideality - seeing language of nature, which speaks to us in the language of mathematics - "triangles, circles" (Galileo). Today is needed most profound dialectical ontological interpretation of the "triangle" (Plato's " heavenly triangle"), "circle", "point". Philosophy, "the mother of all sciences", helps to overcome the crisis in the knowledge and fear. You know it well, since you are looking for the deleted meanings of being.

I start reading your essay.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir



Alexey/Lev Burov replied on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 20:34 GMT
Dear Vladimir, as I said, your "ontological standard" sounds like a totalitarian project. I think it would be good if you show how it might avoid this. Another problem I see in your approach is that I do not think that mental world can be adequately presented in the language of mathematics or similar objectivistic language.

Cheers,

AB.

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 1, 2017 @ 11:15 GMT
Dear Alexey,

The ontological structure of being of the Universum as a whole can not be "totalitarian project". It may be only a "total project", based on the fact that Tot / Θώθ - the god of wisdom and numeracy, the patron of sciences, scribes, holy books, calendar creator in ancient Egypt. But the hypothesis of "The Big Bang Theory" and the system of views on the Universum without any justification of the ontological structure of "beginning" - "totalitarian project".

I do not share the triune world to "worlds" as did Penrose and Popper. I entered the central category of the structure of the Universum - "the ontological (structural, cosmic) memory and presented the primordial structure of the Universum in the form of simple mathematical symbol. Each mathematical concept - object, which is used in the ontological construction - "point with germ of vector", "vector of absolute state of matter", "ontological heavenly triangle (Plato)"- has the deepest (limit, extreme) ontological interpretation. With this I decide two key science issues: super hard problem of the basification (justification, substantiation, foundation) of mathematics (knowledge) and "hard problem of consciousness".

Cheers,

VR.




Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 12:20 GMT
Dear Vladimir ! You embarked with J.A.Wheeler's call for a physics of human consciousness and you introduced your hypothetical construct of ontological memory as being the cosmic matrix of consciousness. Advancing consciousness is,therefore, an extension of the ontological memory of the self; this can best be done by tuning in soulfully with the cosmic memory (the Logos or eternal vibration of perpetual re-creation); such a harmonic life style will lead to the onto-logical stage of absolute simultaneity which means that eternity is now.Take this a my reader response; cordially: stephen

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 12:46 GMT
Dear Stephen,

Many thanks for your deep comment and understanding. You give profound philosophical eidoses, concepts, and the way to overcome the total crisis of understandingin in the fundamental science and global society, deep existential crisis of humanity. Yes, we earthlings, have to make a sharp turn in the thinking. I think that mathematics and physics will be able to overcome the crisis. Sincerely, Vladimir



Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 13:16 GMT
Yes, Vladimir ! We are in need of a natural science of humanity, with physics, sociology and maths as cornerstones; this edifice could be accompanied by a unitarian theological cosmology as J.A.Wheeler proposed. Cordially: stephen

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 14:49 GMT
You are absolutely right, Stephen! And philosophy, "the mother of all sciences", is to bind and embrace this solid foundation and framework of knowledge. We, humans must always bear in mind the philosophical covenant of J.A.Wheeler: “Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers”




Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 17:56 GMT
Dear Vladimir, You wrote a good philosophical the review in the style of the essay.

I've been looking for in philosophy, the answer to the question: "What is the matter?" and not found. The only thing she stubbornly repeated, matter exists in space and in time. At some point I suddenly realized that this is a false statement. It would be correct to say that matter creates space and time. I think it would be a great addition to your essay. I will give you a high ball, when i learn to do it accurately



Boris Dizhechko

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 18:24 GMT
Dear Boris,

Many thanks for your insightful comments. I agree: «It would be correct to say that matter creates space and time.» ... Our task is only to establish the ontological structure of matter, then, accordingly, the ontological structure of space (the ontological space) and its geometry, and then - the nature of time. I'm starting to read your essay with great interest.

Sincerely, Vladimir




James Lee Hoover wrote on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 02:43 GMT
Vladimir,

Almost breathlessly packed with ideas and information, quoting philosophies of old that should replace a lot of current thinking. Physical things alone do not render understanding. "Today we demand of physics some understanding of existence itself."

"Mattersoul" truly brings the mindless math laws and "actual entities" together into goals giving meaning to life. That is really a difficult concept to bring together. I pondered for days trying and am not satisfied with my effort. You parade much thinking before the reader -- ideas that lend wisdom.

I like Whitehead's thought that the "actual world is a process which is the becoming of actual entities." Concrescence is profound in the human thought of the embryo coming together in a seemingly miraculous process of human birth.There is the "generation of individual urgent entities, each having absolute consciousness," and Florensky's "the more solid any system of thought is the more specific is determination of the space as the kernel of this system."

I make a similar metaphoric use of the human fetus and theories about the growth of the early universe modeled in similar amniotic fluid.

Hope you can check out my essay.

Regards,

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 11:07 GMT
Jim,

Many thanks for your insightful comments. Indeed, way out of the contemporary "crisis of understanding" in basic science give us an idea of the outstanding mathematician and philosopher Alfred Whitehead Norton and philosopher Pavel Florensky. Today we need a deeper look at the matter as the eternal process of generation of the material - ideal structures, as "nurse", "godmother" (Plato). Only then we will understand the "soul of matter", including "atom", will understand the direction and purpose of the process of generation of structures.

I enjoy getting to read your essay.

Regards,

Vladimir



James Lee Hoover replied on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 17:30 GMT
Vladimir,

Somewhat of a Renaissance Man and martyr to free thought, Florensky had many contributions.

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 19:13 GMT
Yes, Jim, you are absolutely right. Pavel Florensky paid special attention to the morphology of the space-time of primitive cultures, Antiquity and the Middle Ages. I believe that the idea of "ProstranstvoPonimanie"/"SpaceUnderstanding" is one of the main ideas. It gives a "push" to the search for a new ontology of space.

December 10, 2013 in Sergiev Posad, the memorial sign "Victims of the faith in Christ in the years of persecutions and repressions of the 20th century" was established by the Foundation of Pavel Florensky. The opening of the sign was timed to the memorable date - the 75th anniversary of the execution and martyrdom of Pavel Florensky. Yours faithfully, Vladimir




Steve Dufourny wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 14:06 GMT
Hello Mr Rogozhin,

I enjoyed and liked a lot your essay and its deep meanings.We are all linked since the bengining of this physicality like babies in evolution towards this eternity.We create it ,this paradise :) THE SPHERE AND ITS SPHERES ......

All the best

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 14:46 GMT
Dear Steve,

Thank you very much for your approving comment. Yes, once we earthlings left the "sphere". Now we must think deeply about the "ontological space" where there is a place for BEING and LOGOS. This is the dialectic of "Philosphere" + "Noosphere". Our common goal is to find a way to them.

Sincerely,

Vladimir



Steve Dufourny replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 09:56 GMT
You are welcome Mr Rogozhin,

I agree totally.The unification at all scales after all is a foundamental.We imrpove, optimise,continue the road of complexification of matter, mind, body soul.Like a general harmonious imrpovement.In this line of reasoning, the bad, the evil is purely dedicated to disappear in time space evolution.I beleive that God is near us with this gravitational aether...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 10:16 GMT
Thank you, Steve for your insightful and interesting comment and explanation of your ideas. All the best! Vladimir




James Arnold wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 15:28 GMT
Vladimir,

This is a brilliant exposition of classical philosophy. I can't disagree.

I would be fascinated to read your impression of a much different approach to the question in my paper "Quantum spontaneity and the development of consciousness."

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 16:29 GMT
James,

Thanks a lot for your comment and support. I start translating and reading your essay.

Sincerely, Vladimir




Cristinel Stoica wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 08:42 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

I enjoyed reading your thought-provoking essay. I like how you rely on some of the greatest thinkers of all times and also propose new ideas to address these problems.

Best regards,

Cristi Stoica

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 10:20 GMT
Dear Cristi,

Thank you very much for reading my essay and evaluating my ideas. All the best! Good luck in the Contest! Vladimir




Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 13:31 GMT
Dear Vladimir - although I have a deep appreciation of music and the importance of religious feeling, and of course visual arts (since I am an artist), philosophy eluded me. I feel its importance the lure of a holistic all-encompassing meaning, or lack therof (as in certain modern philosophies). For all that I read every word of your essay and felt as if I was riding the raft in the poem, hearing the song of Yury Loza ( your reference 30) through an enchanted sea of words and ideas. I could grasp some concepts that are of basic importance in my own physiical model of the Universe such as points to vectors - the evolution of energy and matter in a space with no time dimension. As you know from my essay as a physicist I am wary of introducing the observer ie consciousness when formulating mechanistic physics. And as you and Max Planck show science complements religion (poetry, music ...) Thank you for reminding us there is a world beyond dry equations and materialistic effects and ideas

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 17:38 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thank you very much for your comment. Quite right, philosophy makes it possible to "grab" "a holistic all-encompassing meaning". The painter's view does the same and represents this integrity in all colors on the canvas. Science and art, science and philosophy - all together create a single eidos of the world as a whole, filled with the meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E. Husserl). It's very cool that the FQXi Contests give an opportunity to conduct an interested dialogue on the fundamental questions of modern science.

Successes, Vladimir




Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 22:21 GMT
Dear Vladimir I thank you for expanding my mind into the realm of philosophy

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 10:27 GMT
Indeed, without Philosophy, the "mother of all sciences", a crisis of understanding, "trouble with physics" can not be overcome. Physicists should always remember the philosophical covenants of A. Einstein: “At the present time, a physicist has to deal with philosophic problems to a much greater extent than physicists of the previous generations. Physicists forced to that the difficulties of their own science”, and J. A. Wheeler “Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers”. Any physical theory which claims to be a fundamental, must have "clear and distinct"(Descartes) ontological justification.Success in the Сontest and in creativity! Sincerely, Vladimir




Giovanni Prisinzano wrote on Mar. 16, 2017 @ 10:02 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

I read with great pleasure your charming essay, which shows an extraordinary interest in philosophy and science. I especially liked the references to Heraclitus, great pillar of the history of thought, whose fragments continue to stimulate my thinking and the human one in general. But I also particularly appreciated your remarks about Husserl, Whitehead, and Pavel Florensky, thinkers who have moved on the ridge between mathematics and philosophy and have expressed deep considerations on their relationships. It is regrettable that Florensky is not known and read as it deserves in some western countries! I also consider attractive your holistic approach to reality. I am very attracted by that view, but unfortunately I doubt that it is scientifically provable.

A relative limit of your essay is, in my humble opinion, that there is a difference between the first and the second part. The first is more structured and argued, while the last pages are more sketchy, perhaps because you talk about too many things together and you have to limit yourself to simple hints, to stay within the bounds of the contest rules. However, it is a fine contribution and a good read, for which I thank you!

Kind regards and my best wishes for all,

Giovanni

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 16, 2017 @ 11:30 GMT
Dear Giovanni,

Thank you very much for your in-depth comprehensive commentary. The second part of my essay was done in abbreviated form, to enable the reader to carry out independently the ontological construction of the structure of the Universum generating process. I described in more detail the methodology of the ontological construction in the essay "The Formula of Justice: The OntoTopological Basis of Physica and Mathematica" (Contest FQXi 2015).

In the final part of the essay, I presented concisely all my ideas on the problems of philosophy of consciousness, ontology, philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of physics. I consider the solution of the problem of ontological basification (foundation / justification ) of mathematics as the key problem for the whole system of fundamental knowledge, for overcoming the modern crisis of understanding.

Your comment is very valuable to me also because you are deeply interested in the problems of the philosophy of mathematics.

I wish success in the Contest!

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir




Jeffrey Michael Schmitz wrote on Mar. 17, 2017 @ 22:09 GMT
Vladimir,

I wish this was not a contest, but a group project. You seem to be working around and near a core idea, but not fully there. I can now see that I was trying to find the same core, but from a very different direction. Perhaps together the sum would have been greater than the parts. Your breath of knowledge is remarkable and your writing is beautiful.

I hope you do well in the contest.

Sincerely,

Jeff

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 10:28 GMT
Jeff,

Many thanks for the insightful and inspirational thought. I agree with you. I call this project for science - "global brainstorming". Brainstorming on collecting ideas to overcome the crisis in the foundations of "fundamental knowledge." The "arrow of knowledge" should be directed to the search for the "core of knowledge", its ontological structure. I see this as problem number 1 - the super hard problem of the ontological basification of mathematics (knowledge).

Sincerely,

Vladimir




Jurandyr Arone Maues wrote on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 23:52 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

A deep and embracing paper about the subject.

Jurandyr

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 09:02 GMT
Thank you very much, dear Jurandyr!

Sincerely, Vladimir




Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 13:58 GMT
Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of high praise.

You very correctly put questions and answer them.

«What way should we choose for overcoming total crisis of understanding in fundamental science? It should be the way of metaphysical construction of new comprehensive model of ideality on the basis of the modified...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 15:07 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Many thanks for a deep and important comment.

In my understanding, "Ideality" as an ontological foundation of fundamental physics is the ultimate (extreme, absolute) forms of existence of matter (absolute states): absolute rest (linear state, Сontinuum) + absolute motion (vortex state, Discretum) + absolute formation (wave state, Dis-Continuum). "Ideality" is that ultimate value to which the matter is directed, pushed by the "soul of matter" - the ontological (structural) memory (entelechy). Those. "Ideality" inside matter and outside matter, its ultimate goal. It is possible to imagine: ideality "holds" (embraces) and directs the development of matter from two strings. The concept of "field" appears as a generalizing concept of all three limiting states of matter.

I am sure that the reason for understanding the crisis in fudamentalnoy science - it is a crisis of ontology and dialectics. There is a need for a deeper understanding of matter in the spirit of dialectics and ontology of Plato, and ultimately in "grasping" (understanding) the ontological (primordial) structure, and thus understanding "the self-organization of matter".

Any physical theory that claims to be fundamental must have a solid ontological foundation. When creating a "fundamental theory", the "Occam's razor" should be extremely sharp. The current crisis is a conceptual crisis and its overcoming requires the introduction of not only new concepts - attractors, but also a radical revision and refinement of old concepts. Several fundamenoseological paradigms should work in fundamental physics, but the ontological basis must be one.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir




Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 17:05 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

I thank you for a great piece of philosophical work !

Indeed the fundamental structures of our reality are all a question mark.

We all are looking for the reference of reference but we cannot find any secure point in time or space, it is only the "self" nd even that is difficult to explain.

I also tried in my participation to find this reference, the thing I found is maybe a direction towards and then I realised that also this road is hyperbolicly approaching this goal,, and wherever you are the distance seems still as great as in the beginning.

I hope that after reading this little intro you will find some time to read my essay "The Purpose of Life", I await your esteemed comment and rating.

best regards

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 18:06 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Thank you very much for reading my essay and meaningful evaluation. Yes, you are well expressed the thought and purpose of our quest to overcome the "understanding of the crisis," "interpretation of the crisis and of representation" in the "fundamental science»: "...any secure point in time or space, it is only the"self" nd even that is difficult to explain."

I believe that there can only help the extremely constructive metaphysics:"An educated people without a metaphysics is like a richly decorated temple without a holy of holies." (G.W.F.Hegel)

I immediately begin reading your essay.

Best regards

Vladimir




Michael Alexeevich Popov wrote on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 12:44 GMT
Vladimir,

Probably I understand your attitude to analytical Anglo - American tradition of philosophy of physics, however, "Hegel's Self - Consciousness as a goal" in some sense is analytic judgment. Unfortunately, Hegel was not able to create Kant's dream - Pure Metaphysics. Kant transcendental idealism and post - Kantian attempts ( Poincare, Einstein, quantum theorists, Gödel, Eddington, Milne, Bronstein, John Bell and today's holography theorists ) could be understood as attempts to establish idealistic foundations of physics. When physicists assume an existence of the first particle of the Universe they must assume an existence of mathematical rules for such particle deduced from some general metaphysics or MetaLife/Kant's Органон which existed always.

Thus, metaphysics is metaphysics, but physics is merely physics. Because there is well established compatibility of Kantian idealism and contemporary physics , awareness of Kantian "unconscious" foundations represents may be the most productive way to physics unification.

С самыми наилучшими пожеланиями

Michael

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 14:01 GMT
Michael,

Thank you very much for your very important comment. I believe that today, for mathematics and physics, the problems of the philosophical foundations of "fundamental knowledge" have become extremely acute, especially for mathematics - "queen and maids of science". And here there are questions to philosophy itself, first of all ontology. The crisis of the foundations of knowledge pushes the need to deepen the ideas of both Kant and Hegel along the line of "conceptual-figural" synthesis ("schematism") with the goal of "grasping" ("осознание", "узревание") the eidos of the structure "a priori." Logos and Eidos should work together at the deepest essential level, taking into account all the accumulated knowledge.

С самыми наилучшими пожеланиями,

Vladimir




Vladimir Rodin wrote on Mar. 27, 2017 @ 21:52 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

I've read and analysed your essay some time ago. I consider that it's very worthy and deep work deserving high assessment. Your conclusion concerning the crisis in fundamental science "It should be the way of metaphysical construction of new comprehensive model of ideality on the basis of the modified ontology" is rather topical and very important.

My best regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 09:21 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thank you very much for your comments and appreciation of my ideas. The Contest FQXi is first of all new ideas, it is a global open brainstorm on contemporary fundamental issues and problems of Science and Humanity, the solution of which will help the more sustainable development of the system "Nature-Mankind". We, earthlings, see that this system is in a deep existential crisis, the origins of which are in the crisis of understanding in the fundamental science.

Best regards,

Vladimir




George Kirakosyan wrote on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 11:18 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

I am really impressed with your "method of ontological construction" as well with the idea of "ontological (structural, cosmic) memory." Indeed, a new deeper ontology is needed in order to overcome the "crisis of understanding." I think you are very right on this dealt. So, I see your essay as a high - valuable in this contest that deserves to high rating.

Good wishes!

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 11:46 GMT
Many thanks, George! Good wishes!




Robert Groess wrote on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 04:20 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thank you for your favorable comments and for your time in rating my essay about a week ago, where we discussed ontological memory in greater detail. I have enjoyed reading your essay too and would like to thank you for your detailed prose and thought provoking work. It is impressive how densely packed with meaning your sentences are. I wanted to let you know that I have in the meantime likewise returned your favor and have rated your contribution as well.

Regards,

Robert

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 10:30 GMT
Dear Robert,

Thank you very much for comment and evaluation of my ideas. I wish you creative success, and also in the Contest.

Sincerely,

Vladimir




Steven Andresen wrote on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 05:02 GMT
Dear Vladimir

I very much enjoyed reading your essay. You have written very thoughtfully on the frontier and limits of scientific understanding, and where it bumps up against a metaphysical understanding of the world, for which we are in dire need of progressing.

Your suggestion that the fractured nature of our universal awareness is in part responsible for the disunity of human global societal affairs, is very interesting and thought provoking. And then you deliver the message that a complete metaphysical understanding of the natural world, will contribute greatly towards bringing peoples together. This is an extremely positive message and one that makes me want to be a contributor towards.

You have introduced me to poetic and philosophical ideas which I have not otherwise discovered. Thank you for opening my mind to new ideas and positive possibilities. I rate your opinions and work highly.

Steven Andresen

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2890

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 10:35 GMT
Dear Steven,

Thank you very much for comment and evaluation of my ideas. I wish you creative success, and also in the Contest.

Sincerely,

Vladimir




basudeba mishra wrote on Apr. 2, 2017 @ 04:28 GMT
Dear Sir,

There is some confusion about Heisenberg’s postulate. When Heisenberg proposed his conjecture in 1927, Earle Kennard independently derived a different formulation, which was later generalized by Howard Robertson as: σ(q)σ(p) ≥ h/4π. This inequality says that one cannot suppress quantum fluctuations of both position σ(q) and momentum σ(p) lower than a certain limit...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Apr. 2, 2017 @ 10:43 GMT
Dear Basudeba,

Thank you very much for your wonderful comment. I suppose that the problem of the ontological basification (foundation / justification ) of mathematics (knowledge) today is the problem №1 for fundamental knowledge and philosophy, taking into account all the "troubles with physics"(Lee Smolin," The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next") and "loss of certainty" (Morris Kline in "Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty"). A good idea of Alexander Zenkin for choosing a way to overcome the crisis of knowledge: «the truth should be drawn…»

The modern crisis of understanding in the foundations of knowledge is a deep metaphysical crisis - a comprehensive crisis of ontology, gnosecology, axiology, dialectics. The world picture of physicists, mathematicians, poets and musicians should be united and filled with meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E.Husserl).

First of all, the fundamental science is responsible for the preservation of life on Mother Earth - our Common Space Home , the selection of our joint way to the future. Therefore, in order to overcome the crisis of understanding, it is very important to purposefully support various epistemological paradigms and to introduce the Ontological standard of substantiation of fundamental theories.

Sincerely, Vladimir




Gavin William Rowland wrote on Apr. 2, 2017 @ 10:07 GMT
Dear Vladimir

I very much enjoyed your paper. Especially the opening quote and the suggestion that we are facing a crisis of metaphysical understanding. The problem can only become more acute . I think we will get to the stage where all major avenues of inquiry have come to points where economics won't permit larger colliders/telescopes etc. At the same time we will be facing a developing crisis of global climate change and sea level rise.

I think my metaphysical scheme will be of interest to you. I encourage you to read my paper.

Best regards

Gavin

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Apr. 2, 2017 @ 11:31 GMT
Dear Gavin,

Many thanks for your comment and understanding of my conception of ontology and dialectics of the primordial beginning of the Universum. I began reading your essay with great interest.

Sincerely, Vladimir




George Kirakosyan wrote on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 05:47 GMT
Dear Vladimir (on your post in my page)

I will answer simply as your question is – yes, my dear! I have solved this problem. The matter is however, that the market management does not need to see this; they have preferred to see how people beating by their heads on the wall… Regarding on this I can suggest you rereading the “Gulliver's Travels” of amazing English classic’s Jonathan Swift, - namely, the chapter devoted to “Grand Academy of Lagado.” I think our present situation somewhat close to this.

Thanks for attention and Best wishes to you!

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 11:22 GMT
Yes, George, fairy tales should be read more often, especially carefully "Gulliver's Travels". Travel and wandering make it possible to "grasp" (understand) the structure of space. Павел Флоренский: "Повторяем: миропонимание - пространствопонимание" But in order to overcome the crisis of understanding in the foundations of knowledge, one must work with several epistemological paradigms.Warmest wishes. Vladimir




Christian Corda wrote on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 09:41 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Once again, you released a remarkable contribution in FQXi Essay Contest. In fact, I find your Essay intriguing and a bit provocative (I strongly appreciate "thinking outside the box"). In particular, the issue of coincidentia oppositirum has always fascinated me. I had a lot of fun in reading your nice Essay, thus, I will pleasured to give you the highest score. Congrats and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

report post as inappropriate


Author Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 10:42 GMT
Dear Christian,

Thank you very much for your encouraging comment and support for my extremely crazy ideas. I believe that the Information Age poses the deepest metaphysical questions before fundamental science and humanity that did not exist in the last century. All Contests FQXi aimed at finding solutions to these fundamental questions. Many thanks to the FQXi for these global open Contests!

Best wishes, Vladimir




Lorraine Ford wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 11:07 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thanks for another impressive essay.

I strongly agree with you that we have a deep being-knowledge-values and ethics crisis in the world: “It is not only crisis of mathematics and physics but also a general crisis of philosophy - "mother of all sciences". It is deep onto-gnoseo-axiological crisis, crisis of knowledge basis which is transformed to comprehensive existential crisis when the question of existence of Humanity and all live on Earth has become extremely aggravated.”

It is important to know what is the “the law, meaning, basis and structure of a thing”. If we understand that Logos, the "reason which governs the Universe", “doesn't exist separately from things, it is present in everything”, then we wouldn’t see the universe as mindless and meaningless.

Best regards,

Lorraine

report post as inappropriate

Author Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 11:22 GMT
Dear Lorraine,

Many thanks for your encouraging comment in support of my ideas.

Best regards,

Vladimir




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.