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

Anonymous: on 4/10/17 at 23:21pm UTC, wrote Dear Larissa, thanks for your comment. Certainly I havt to look in this...

Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga: on 4/7/17 at 21:38pm UTC, wrote Dear Tejinder, thanks for your words and voting. I will certainly dig...

Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga: on 4/7/17 at 21:33pm UTC, wrote Dear Claudio, thanks for the comment. I posted something in your forum. ...

Claudio Borsello: on 4/7/17 at 19:33pm UTC, wrote Dear Torsten, I've found your essay very passionating. I'm also sure that...

Tejinder Singh: on 4/7/17 at 18:01pm UTC, wrote Dear Torsten, You have a beautiful essay! I will pen down my comments...

Larissa Albantakis : on 4/7/17 at 13:59pm UTC, wrote Dear Torsten, Your description of the dynamic loops reminded me of the...

Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga: on 4/7/17 at 13:29pm UTC, wrote Dear Jochen, thanks for your words and for reading my essay. you are...

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 4/7/17 at 11:06am UTC, wrote Dear Sirs! Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Lorraine Ford: "Re “I won't reply if you post outside the thread”: Tom, next you’ll..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

John Cox: "Just posting to reclaim the clickable heading for this topic." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Anonymous: "Is the phishing bot attack over? The headings column is still full of..." in Sounding the Drums to...

smith jina: "awesome post, thank you. Epson Help Epson Support Epson Support Number ..." in What Happens Inside the...

Brain Wave: "Beauty Tips Skin Tips Beauty Tips For Face Natural Beauty Tips Beauty..." in A Deeper Understanding

Brain Wave: "Beauty Tips Skin Tips Beauty Tips For Face Natural Beauty Tips Beauty..." in Building a Better Black...

Brain Wave: "Beauty Tips Skin Tips Beauty Tips For Face Natural Beauty Tips Beauty..." in Co-Travelers

Brain Wave: "Beauty Tips Skin Tips Beauty Tips For Face Natural Beauty Tips Beauty..." in Talking Heads


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 22, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: The Fractal Nature of Consciousness and Intuition by Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga wrote on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 20:21 GMT
Essay Abstract

In this essay I will discuss the central question: how can a large network of neurons acquire consciousness or intuition? Furthermore I will present a model for the activity inside of the neural network which based on the principles of quantum physics. This model has similar features known from the theory of random surfaces and spin networks. Here we will analyze the network by considering the interaction of neurons by feedback loops. If one takes the signal amplitudes and frequency into account where high signals with high frequency representing learned features then the signal network degenerates to a tree. But then, the set of learned information (or the sample of examples to learn the network) can be divided into a finite number of classes. Then we are able to describe the learning process itself. Furthermore we will discuss what is intuition by introducing new relations between the feedback loops. Then we will obtain a simple criteria that a network has classified the information of the learning sample: the classes forming a fractal. Finally we will end up with the statement: Mindless rules (mathematics) are able to generate mind.

Author Bio

I'm a researcher at the German Aerospace Center with widespreaded interests. My current work is in direction of quantum gravity and cosmology. There, I used mathematical methods from topology to understand quantum gravity. In particular, exotic smoothness structures of the spacetime is my main research topic.

Download Essay PDF File




John C Hodge wrote on Mar. 1, 2017 @ 17:29 GMT
You are onto something. Perhaps a link to the LaMuth essay with levels to pass through.

Hodge

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 19:56 GMT
I will have a look into this essay soon.

Torsten




Steve Dufourny wrote on Mar. 1, 2017 @ 22:17 GMT
Hi Mr Maluga,

Happy to see this fractal, I consider the central sphere the singularity for all serie of uniqueness, a finte serie.I consider the central sphere like the biggest volume and I believe that the primes has something to do.The relevance is that space disappears due to this universal serie of spherical volumes.I consider in my theory of spherisation with quant and cosmol 3D sphères Inside the universal sphere that all singularitites ,quant and cosm is Under an universal fractal considering even the gravitation and the quantum gravitation.The space does not exist, only matter and energy exists.Here is my equation E=m(b)c²+m(nb)l² about quantum gravitationa and cold dark matter produced by BHs.Don't hesistate to ask détails

Regards and good luck

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 19:55 GMT
Dear Steve,

I have to dig deeper in your theory but using fractals is maybe a good beginning. More later,

Best wishes

Torsten




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 15:19 GMT
Dear Asselmeyer,

Thank you for the nice essay on neural networks of brain.

Your narration is excellent, You described a qualitative model for neural networks like the human brain which is based on interactions between neurons along loops, the feedback loops.’

You are a cosmologist working on quantum gravity etc…. I request you to have a look on my essay...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 19:51 GMT
Dear Mr. Gupta,

now I will start reading other essays and of course I will comment on your ideas soon. Thanks for your words about my essay and for the effort to read it.

Best Torsten




Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 16:49 GMT
Dear Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

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

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 perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 19:53 GMT
Dear Joe,

I will start reading your essay (remembering on discussions some years ago).

Best Torsten




Daniel de França Diniz Rocha wrote on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 23:17 GMT
Dear Torsten,

I once thought about cognition being derived from closed loops. The reason for is since we are aware of many things, even if unconsciously, I think we are at least in very a neurotic and compulsive state of mind towards any kind of information. And, indeed, the circuitry of our brain is made of small loops, when information is kept stored, and large loops, which pass through the Thalamus several times, being redistributed to several other parts of the brains. So, it is basically a mechanism cortex-thalamus-cortex-thalamus. The cerebellum here may also include cerebellum, for extremely repetitive and fast processing.

Interestingly,thought not related to what led me to think about the latter, In fact, one the earliest types of computer memory a similar idea:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delay_line_memory

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 18:07 GMT
Dear Daniel,

thanks for your comments. I had the feeling that the loop hypothesis is correct. I was thing that there is an interaction between neurons which can be not directly realized (so that it forms a loop).

Your explaination is interesting and I need only some loops for my argument.

Certainly I have to look in your essay.

Best wishes

Torsten



Daniel de França Diniz Rocha replied on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 00:43 GMT
Correction: So, it is basically a mechanism cortex-thalamus-cortex-thalamus. The cerebellum here may also include cerebellum, for extremely repetitive and fast processing.

The correct is

So, it is basically a mechanism cortex-thalamus-cortex-thalamus. The "brain" here may also include cerebellum, for extremely repetitive and fast processing.

report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 01:06 GMT
Torsten,

Great essay! I discuss very much the same thing in my essay which is in line with MERA or tensor networks. There is a sort of analogue between quantum cosmology, or quantum bits in cosmology and general information networks. The universe is a network of causal sets. There is I think a switch between blue and green in the pictorial representation of contractible and noncontractible loops.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell replied on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 01:08 GMT
This post was from me, but for some reason I was logged out. I boosted your score a bit!

LC

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 22:04 GMT
Dear Lawrence,

thanks for reading my essay. Today I had the chance to read your essay (in the train). You are right that our essays are connected. The math is a little bit different but the idias look similar.

I better post my question in your essay part.

Best Torsten




Cristinel Stoica wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 10:03 GMT
Dear Torsten,

I enjoyed reading your essay. I like how you applied the theory developed by Morgan and Shalen for 3-manifolds to neural networks and feedback loops, to explain learning and intuition. The essay was clear, self-contained, and well written. I think this approach may make interesting applications to the study of the processes taking place in the consciousness.

Best wishes,

Cristi Stoica

The Tablet of the Metalaw

report post as inappropriate


Member George F. R. Ellis wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 12:50 GMT
Dear Torsten,

You deal with important issues; in particular, "The interaction between neurons given by the feedback loops controls the behavior of the neurons in the loop. In philosophy, one calls this behavior top-down causation: Top-down causation refers to the effects on components of organized systems that cannot be fully analyzed in terms of component-level behavior but instead requires reference to the higher-level system itself. This model serves as a simple example of this principle."

This is indeed a good example, which I appreciate. The concept is dealt with in more general contexts in my recent book How Can Physics Underlie the Mind?.

Regards

George Ellis

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 22:07 GMT
Dear Prof Ellis,

I'm honnored that you read my essay.

Currently I had no chance to have a look into your book but I plan to read it. Today I read your essay but I will better comment in your essay part.

Best Torsten




Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Mar. 14, 2017 @ 01:34 GMT
I will try to respond tomorrow. I got the flu a few weeks ago and now I have bronchitis that is sort of dragging me down. I do have a question concerning the Uhlenbeck, Freed, Donaldson type of result, but I will have to wait until tomorrow if I am better.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate


Willy K wrote on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 05:17 GMT
Hi Torsten

Since I am not conversant with hyperbolic geometry and quantum physics, I cannot pretend to have understood all the fine details present in your modeling of the neural network, but I certainly found it to be intriguing, since my own essay was attempting a different type of modeling, that of the social system. What I found most interesting about your model was that the top-down flow of neural activity is more predictive of conscious awareness than the bottom-up flow of activity. You go on to state in the conclusion, “Top down causation refers to the effects on components of organized systems that cannot be fully analyzed in terms of component-level behavior but instead requires reference to the higher-level system itself”.

Speaking purely from what I would expect to be the case for intelligent systems, (without much knowledge of the brain as an organ), I would expect such top down causation to be present if a system is to be considered as intelligent. And although I have not thought about it in precisely those terms in my essay, I think you might be able to recognize this top down behavior in it as well. I think you have written a great essay and I rate it accordingly.

Warm Regards, Willy

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 20:03 GMT
Dear Willy,

thanks for your words and in particular for reading my essay. I printed your essay today and will read it in the next days.

I agree with you that top-down causation is one important sign for intelligence but also complex behaviour. Interestingly, at first I also thought about to write the essay about social systems. So, I'm eager to read your ideas.

Thanks also fo rthe voting (unfortunately destroyed by another down-voting).

Best wishes (and more soon)

Torsten



Willy K replied on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 07:07 GMT
Hi Torsten

Since you haven't yet reviewed, I thought I'll sneak in a comment here. You are probably familiar with Conant's Good Regulator Theorem, since it explicitly deals with brains as an example. I would greatly value your feedback on whether it is applicable to my work.

http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/books/Conant_Ashby.pdf

At present my understanding is that it is applicable. My interpretation of Conant, in the domain of brains, would be that it is the regulational part of the brain that is a model of the brain's basic perturbations. This is a slightly different emphasis from Conant, since in his work he suggested that the entire brain 'must' model its environment.

On modeling the external world, the brain may not be a perfect at it, but if enough focus is given to a certain area of the external world, the brain could eventually be trained to model that part of the external world very well. Please let me know what you think.

Warm Regards, Willy

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 27, 2017 @ 21:38 GMT
Dear Willy,

at first I was travelling the last three days and here is my delayed answer...

Thanks for reading my essay and the comments.

I agree with you completely as top-down causation is a very important sign for intelligence

but not the only one (there are also complex systems showing top-down causation without

being alife).

With great interest I also read your essay. Before I found this model about the neural

networks I also thought about social systems (right in your spirit). As you correctly

stated hierarchical structures played a strong role in this game. (I like the Nelson Mandela cite) I miss a little bit the evolutionary elment in your discussion (my work enforced me to think in this direction).

I'm quit esure that this regulator theorem is applicable for you theory as well.

Thanks for writing such a good essay

Best wishes

Torsten




Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 16:12 GMT
Hello Torsten..

I wanted to thank you for the comments left on my essay page, and to let you know I have begun to read and enjoy your essay. There is a lot to digest! I like the way you introduce the need for top-down interactions, to provide a faithful model of perception. I think both the universe and our awareness of it are participatory, even though much is automatic. I think learning about the non-automatic part is the key to understanding perception. Playing with ideas gives more insight than memorizing.

I appreciate the link to your paper with a no-go result for an n-qubit Spin-2 Hamiltonian simulation. This could be relevant to the matter of quantum computing via a BEC/BH event horizon analogy, I imagine. I apologize for the delay responding. I submerged myself to finish my first ever essay for the Gravity Research Foundation contest, but that is now sent in. Back to you soon, with more on your essay.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 21:58 GMT
Hello Jonathan,

what a nice coincidence: I also submit my essay for GRG today.

I'm glad you like the no-go paper (it was never published in a journal. It was rejected because the result is of no interest for physics).

I'm eager to see your feedback

All the best

Torsten




James Lee Hoover wrote on Mar. 23, 2017 @ 17:16 GMT
Torsten,

Remember you from the last contest.

I wonder if topology could shed light to the 1.8 billion light-years across supervoid, seemingly an anomaly scientists have discovered, something I reference in my essay.

Neural network models are a quite intriguing addition to neural studies. I would think that a qualitative approach for the brain is especially effective considering the multitudinous neural pathways of the brain.

Mindless rules will generate mind! Clever.

Hope you get a chance to comment on mine.

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 23, 2017 @ 22:47 GMT
Jim,

thanks for reading my essay and for the comments.

After the completion of my GRG essay I will have a look into your essay soon (it is on my reading list).

Therefore More later

Torsten



James Lee Hoover replied on Mar. 29, 2017 @ 04:41 GMT
Torsten,

Don't know what a GRG essay is.

Jim

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 10:19 GMT
Jim,

GRG essay contest: it is an essay contest of the Gravity Research Foundation having the deadline at April, 1st.

But now I'm free (with not much time for voting).

Best

Torsten




Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 24, 2017 @ 04:38 GMT
This is excellent work Torsten!

I have a quibble, that in human brain learning studies it was found that the naive view holding that similarities of structure between table result in similar memory encoding is untrue, but it was found that memory images were grouped by function instead. So there are several places a coffee cup appears represented in the brain, depending on whether it is empty or full, clean or dirty, and so on. It's usage determines how it is stored. So we might find table and couch represented in the same brain areas.

But this is in keeping with your observation of the importance of top-down influences, because to a living being in the real world objects are meant to be used or to have uses - which affects how we conceive of it. The old Chinese proverb is that the value of an urn is the space it contains. But this is an object fashioned by humans because it can fulfill a particular purpose. It is interesting though, that this purpose orientation is a driver of neurological specialization.

It was worth taking the time needed to digest the Maths, so I could get a better perspective of your intended meaning. But more digestion is required; you have given me a lot of food for thought, between your essay and comments, so I'll likely have some questions or a few comments of my own. An excellent read overall, and I hope you do well in the contest.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Mar. 24, 2017 @ 04:40 GMT
Gee whiz...

That was meant to be 'a chair and a couch.'

Best, JJD

report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 24, 2017 @ 16:04 GMT
I wanted to cycle back and say more..

First; I love the notion that consciousness is a fractal, and the fact it is the end result of your test process is very cool. It appears that the definition arises solely by imposing topological conditions and mapping the resulting parameter space; is this correct?

I've become fond of the idea that fractals are a way for nature to squeeze in more information than would otherwise fit in the constraints of certain geometrical or topological parameters. The folding of space at the boundaries provides an extensive working surface, and the self-similarity assures a consistent rule will emerge for entities exploring that parameter space. So it is, I guess, natural that emergent consciousness would be characterized by fractality. I will continue to ponder what you have written.

I hope that, at some point, we can expand our conversation beyond the contest topic. My current research carries me into areas where your expertise would be very helpful. The Mandelbrot Set suggests a geometrical route to unifying gravity with the rest of Physics. At (-0.75, 0i); the 5-d black hole --> 4-d spacetime scenario proposed by Pourhasan, Afshordi, and Mann is realized (if embedding M in the octonions is assumed), because Cartan's rolling-ball analogy of G2 symmetries is precisely modeled. And so is the set-up for DGP gravity!

Further down; the Misiurewicz point near (-1.543689, 0i) is an exact model for the quantum critical point of BEC formation, where an analogy can be made with Schwarzschild event horizons. This connection was first suggested by Sakharov, but has been extensively treated in recent papers by Dvali and colleagues. As you know, this has deep connections with topology, exploring degrees of freedom, and so on. But there is much work to be done, to carry this to fruition.

More later,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 24, 2017 @ 21:26 GMT
I was pleased to see I'd boosted your score to par with mine..

But now I see someone has knocked it back down again. This essay deserves to be in the finals, so that it will receive a review by someone intelligent enough to rate its quality fairly. Again I wish you luck Torsten.

Regards,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Mar. 27, 2017 @ 20:48 GMT
Dear Jonthan,

at first I was travelling the last three days and here is my delayed answer..

Thanks for the voting and for your words. I hope to get a chance for the next round but to have a chance for good discussions is also very good.

Your interpretation of fractals (as squeezing information) is very good. I never thought in this direction. Fractals is only one method for a more general view, a wild embedding (like Alexanders horned sphere). I wrote about it in the previous FqXi essay contests. I found it by chance during my research on exotic smoothness. The interesting point is the equivalence between wild embeddings and quantum states (and therefore fractals as wild embeddings of the circle must be also correspond to some quantum state).

Therefore what you wrote about Mandelbrot sets and unification contains maybe a very deep truth. We should start an email exchange about it (torsten.asselmeyer-maluga@dlr.de) if you like....

As a direct reaction: it was interesting what you wrote about functional memory of our brain. Honestly I don't know it. I was guided by mathematics when I developed this model.

Thanks again for voting

More later

Torsten



Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 19:34 GMT
I shall begin an e-mail discussion..

The term 'mirror neurons' comes to mind, regarding the specificity of activated brain areas being associated with various actions an object might perform, rather than with an object by its qualities of construction or appearance.

More later,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate


Robert Groess wrote on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 21:05 GMT
Dear Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga,

Thank you for your detailed and colorful essay on neural networks and the fractal nature of the ability to generate intention. While I have had some limited experience with neural networks over the past 20 years, your essay has inspired me with some fresh perspectives. I find the fact that "feedback loops produce the topology of the network" to be a key step in future computational ability too. We are also in agreement about the nature of top-down and bottom up feedback loops being essential in such realizations. Thank you for writing so succinctly and with great examples. I have enjoyed your essay and have rated it too.

Regards,

Robert

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 10:23 GMT
Dear Robert,

certainly I plan to read your essay. It looks very interesting and I must dig deeper...

Thanks for your words and voting

All the best and good luck for the contest

Torsten




Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 05:50 GMT
I hope you enjoy the paper I sent you Torsten..

I have been thinking also about a fractal relation involving developed land and forests or other natural spaces. It appears that the quality of life is higher when humans and nature are in close proximity, where conventional planning often eliminates buffer zones in neighborhoods, or isolates them, but interpenetration allows ease of boundary crossing. Anyhow; I think fractal human/nature boundaries are optimal and that it would be good to write about this. It is broadly in line with your essay topic, but this is a question I've pondered for some time.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 10:17 GMT
Hi Jonathan,

I have to further think about the paper you sent me. More directly via email.

Great idea to write something about ecology and human-nature interactions. There are also so many fractal structures in nature itself. Right I have also to think about it.

Best Torsten



Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 04:03 GMT
Thanks Torsten,

I have a friend Jolanda who was form many years a Civil Engineer and now has a degree and practice in Environmental Law. She may have some insights or information relevant to our writing about human/nature boundaries and to quantify changes in fractal dimension before and after development.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate


Member Rick Searle wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 01:04 GMT
Hi Torsten,

Great paper, and I totally agree with what I think is the assumption behind it: that the only way the problem of consciousness will be solved will be to apply ideas from multiple disciplines- including advanced mathematics and physics.

Best of luck in the contest and om your research,

Rick Searle

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 10:14 GMT
Hi Rick,

thanks for your words. I like multiple disciplines. One can take the best from each. I already comment your essay, also great work.

All the best and good luck in the contest

Torsten




adel sadeq wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 14:41 GMT
Hi Torsten,

Your idea is similar to the idea of deep learning in AI via Renormalization group. Googling will get you many papers. As a matter of fact my system generates RG automatically.

You have seen my system before but in my new essay which is short and sweet:) I derive Newtons gravitation(long distance) law from the SAME system that generate all the quantum mechanical results. Moreover, the simulations that predict the electron and the proton now I find an analog of it in the standard physics via Helmann potential which is a combination of Coulomb and Yukawa potentials. Thanks for your attention.

last year essay

your this year essay

see gravity,p2

gravity

report post as inappropriate

adel sadeq replied on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 22:26 GMT
Sorry, that should be gravity "P" energy in the results. thanks

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 4, 2017 @ 21:25 GMT
Hi adel sadeq,

thanks for your hint. I think my approach is a little bit more general and flexible then renormalization group approach. In particular, I'm not limited to the Ising model. But again, thanks for the hint. I will study more work in this direction.

Now to your work: honestly I had some problems to understand it (including your last year essay). It was not obvious to me how you will get the quantum mechanics? In this year essay, how did you get the Hellman potential? Did you assume it?

Best wishes and good luck with the contest

Torsten



adel sadeq replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 18:58 GMT
Hi Torsten,

Thank you for reviewing my essay. As you know my system is based on a simulation of a mathematical structure that is based on random numbers that lead to known physics result , so it was natural for me to try to connect it(or somehow convert it) to standard methods in physics. During such a search I stumbled on the Helmann potential and noticed that it pretty much produced similar curves to my simulation. Of course such potential has a different use in standard physics, however, it seems that the original Yukawa interpretation of "force particles" might not have been a good idea! Also, it was natural that at distances longer than Compton wavelength the Coulomb potential should take over. In another word, to interpret Yukawa's potential the same as Coulomb i.e. two particles(actual) interacting as in chirality!

As to the idea itself, I understand that people don't have all the time or inclination to examine other ideas to a great extend. But I have shown in numerous examples and simulations with NUMBERS how the QM/QFT phenomenology arises from such structure.

My best hope is to give people a quick taste of the idea. And at least I hope people spend few minutes to run the simulations, especially the Newton's gravity law generation.

Thanks again.

report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Apr. 4, 2017 @ 11:27 GMT
Torsten,

A great essay as usual, right on topic, well written and more importantly for me correctly identifying the quantum scale mechanisms, layered (fractal) and feedback based architecture producing the - almost 'illusion', of aims, intent and even consciousness.

Of course I would think all that as my essay describes and concludes exactly the same components and structure, so is very complementary, though where you more thoroughly cover the key point I also identify important related matters at the highest and lowest ends of the scale. I hope you may particularly comment on my identifcation of a classical derivation of QM's 'probability' distribution, built wearing last years red & green socks!

I gather yours too has been hit by '1's. Mines had 11! but I've refused to retaliate. I think yours is worth far more than it's current placing suggests. Close now to final scoring so I hope you'll get to read mine and confirm you agree with my analysis of our complementarity or raise any issues.

Very well done, again, and best of luck.

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 4, 2017 @ 21:37 GMT
Dear Peter,

thanks for your words and the voting (which I really need).

Today I had a chance to look into your essay. Interestingly I had a kind of deja vu. You got also similar structures (like SU(2) etc.). So, I agree that our essays are complementary. In particular, your essay is the background of my essay and vice verse.

Well done, Peter.

Of course I will comment on your interpretation of QM but better on your comment area.

All the bestfor you and good luck in the contest

Torsten

PS: That speaks in your favour that you don't retaliate. I also don't do it.



Peter Jackson replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 09:26 GMT
Torsten,

I'm glad you agree on our agreement. I think we're both right on topic and get straight to the heart (and brain!) of the matter and it's dynamics. Certainly some 10's around here I think! I hope you'll also check out my video.Classic QM on vimeo. I'm also always up for collaboration. Loners can't penetrate doctrine and few have all the skills.

I'm scoring yours now. Very well done. Do please comment on/criticise the video.

Peter

report post as inappropriate


Natesh Ganesh wrote on Apr. 4, 2017 @ 18:03 GMT
Dear Torsten,

A very well written technical essay, that makes some very interesting points. While I grasped the larger ideas of feedback loops, top-down effects and the results you obtained on fractal curves, I can see the devil is in the details. I wish my knowledge of topology was better to better appreciate some of the results and insights here, but I intend to change that and come back to this paper again once I have a better grasp of related concepts (PS: If you can suggest some kind of good resource for someone who is beginning to study topology, I would be very grateful. I rather not start with some of the advanced references in your submission).

Please know that I appreciate the mathematical rigor of your work, for I think it is important to not be wishy washy when dealing with issues of learning and intuition. My submission shows that our learning is intricately tied to feedback-feedforward models. I also agree on the idea of top-down causation (though I prefer that Ellis is now referring it to as top-down realization). It is heartening to see that over the course of the various submissions, there seems to be a growing consensus emerging on what some of the important ideas to probe further are.

This is great work and focuses on the important questions. I have rated it highly so that it can make it to the final deservedly, and can be judged fairly for its proper technical content. I now look forward to going back and reading your past winning essays on this forum. Thanks and good luck in the contest!!

Cheers

Natesh

PS: My email is nganesh@umass.edu. Please feel free to reach out. I would love to see where you go further on this line of work. Hopefully I will gain more understanding on this area of math, as I dive deeper. I am particularly interested in understanding strange non-chaotic attractors.

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 15:23 GMT
Dear Natesh,

at first thanks for this reply (and of course for the upvoting, I'm gonna need it)

I agree completely with your summarize of the contest. Top-down causation is one idea that admits growing consensus in many essays.

As you statedin your comment, I like mathematical models with some level of rigor and I'm very glad that we agree in this point.

I will ceratinly send you some literature by email.

Thanks again for the voting and all the best as well good luck in the contest!

Torsten




Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 04:06 GMT
It is good to see that..

If the qualifying round ended right now, you and I would both be in the finals. I wish you luck now and into the future Torsten. I left another brief reply/comment above.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 10:36 GMT
Dear Torsten,

With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of high rating. Excellently written.

Your work is related to my interests

«My current work is in direction of quantum gravity and cosmology. There, I used mathematical methods from topology to understand quantum gravity.»

«I had the feeling that the loop hypothesis is correct. I was thing that there is an interaction between neurons which can be not directly realized (so that it forms a loop).»


The cycles you already have, they are connected to your torus loops

«the two generators of non-contractable loops of the torus (or doughnut) as example.»

About how torus loops function from a physical point of view and how they form large loops by which they interact with each other at resonant frequencies, is shown in my essay.

I wish you success in the contest.

Kind regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate


Jochen Szangolies wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 07:18 GMT
Dear Torsten,

you propose an intriguing new way of looking at neural networks in terms of topologically stable structures---feedback loops. I'm not sure, however, I understand it fully. I would see an analogy to (topological) error correction here: the whole network, i.e. the detailed states (firing or not-firing) of all the neurons, yields the codespace, while only the topologically protected structures encode information; that way, the information is robust to small, random fluctuations within the network, i.e. noise. Is this somewhat close?

I'm not sure, then, what exactly you mean by the 'strength' and 'phase' of a signal. Are you referring to the signal carried by a given feedback loop? If so, is the strength related to the rate of firing, and the phase to the timing?

In the end, it's an interesting proposal, which however I feel could benefit from a more in-depth treatment (but of course, that's hard to do within the length constraints of this essay contest).

Hope you do well!

Cheers,

Jochen

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 13:29 GMT
Dear Jochen,

thanks for your words and for reading my essay.

you are right that the whole approach is invariant for small fluctuations because of the topological structure. You are also right that strngth is the rate of firing and phase is the timing (I thought that I wrote at some place).

In principle, I describe the topological structure of the space of neuron firing. Also this topologicval structure is robust w.r.t. fluctuations.

Here is also where the structure change happens: for higher rates of firing and long time, this structure changes from a network (as picture of the brain network) into a tree.

You are right I have to present more details but there was not room. Furthermore, the math is not so easy to present.

So thanks again

Best

Torsten




Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 11:06 GMT
Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use «spam».

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris

report post as inappropriate


Larissa Albantakis wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 13:59 GMT
Dear Torsten,

Your description of the dynamic loops reminded me of the dynamic theory of consciousness by T Fekete and S Edelman (e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4961712/). I like the approach. What always bothered me a bit is that there is no good examples of the consequences of their proposal. A good model often goes a long way and maybe your work could be a good starting point for that!

All the best!

Larissa

report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Apr. 10, 2017 @ 23:21 GMT
Dear Larissa,

thanks for your comment. Certainly I havt to look in this paper. Many thanks for the reference.

Many thanks for your words. The model was the first trail during the course of writing the essay. So, the model is absolutely new and I had also not so much time to think about all consequences.

All the best,

Torsten

report post as inappropriate


Member Tejinder Pal Singh wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 18:01 GMT
Dear Torsten,

You have a beautiful essay!

I will pen down my comments shortly.

Best,

Tejinder

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 21:38 GMT
Dear Tejinder,

thanks for your words and voting. I will certainly dig deeper in your theory.

All the best and good luck for the contest

Torsten

PS: I'm of course eager to read your comments.




Claudio Baldi Borsello wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 19:33 GMT
Dear Torsten,

I've found your essay very passionating. I'm also sure that complexity can emerge from a multitude of simple events playing few simple rules.

Nevertheless in my essay I take into account also concepts like choice and freedom, that make the difference between an expert-system (that you can call mind) and a concious entity.

I would appreciate that you would give me your opinion on my paper and give a score.

Best wishes,

Claudio B Borsello

report post as inappropriate

Author Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga replied on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 21:33 GMT
Dear Claudio,

thanks for the comment. I posted something in your forum.

All the best

Torsten




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.