Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Efthimios Harokopos: on 4/7/17 at 18:00pm UTC, wrote Dizhechko , I will read your essay with great interest. Thanks for your...

Efthimios Harokopos: on 4/7/17 at 17:58pm UTC, wrote Peter, Thank you. I will read your essay carefully. I dealt with causality...

Linna Landau: on 4/7/17 at 10:09am UTC, wrote I am sorry we weren't taught it properly in school or in college. Now I...

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 4/7/17 at 9:48am UTC, wrote Dear Sirs! Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of...

Peter Jackson: on 4/6/17 at 11:50am UTC, wrote Efthimios, Nice essay, interesting, original, very well written and...

Efthimios Harokopos: on 3/20/17 at 9:04am UTC, wrote Thank you Edwin. It's surprising that each time someone comments about the...

Edwin Klingman: on 3/19/17 at 0:10am UTC, wrote Dear Efthimios Harokopos, Thank you for an exceptional essay. The...

Willy K: on 3/14/17 at 7:05am UTC, wrote There are risks brought about by centralisation, but some of those risks...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

kurt stocklmeir: "if space is expanding and if this makes positive energy particles have a..." in Alternative Models of...

nimit theeraleekul: "Dear friends, In my early post, I said that we could see detail of..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

nimit theeraleekul: "Dear Administrator, I have tried to make several posts with an attachment,..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

Gary Simpson: "Pentcho, I did not need the postulates of SR to propose the mechanism. In..." in Alternative Models of...

Pentcho Valev: "Gary, "I can propose a physical mechanism for length contraction" You..." in Alternative Models of...

Robert Martin: "Theories of everything, he contends, can be depicted as those which draw on..." in Theories of Everything,...

Gary Simpson: "Pentcho, I'm not asking for you to comment upon my essay. I am asking you..." in We Are All Connected

Pentcho Valev: "Gary, Einstein deduced his concept of time (spacetime) from two..." in We Are All Connected


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

The Spacetime Revolutionary
Carlo Rovelli describes how black holes may transition to "white holes," according to loop quantum gravity, a radical rewrite of fundamental physics.

Riding the Rogue Quantum Waves
Could giant sea swells help explain how the macroscopic world emerges from the quantum microworld? (Image credit: MIT News)


FQXi FORUM
May 24, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: No Free Lunch by Efthimios Harokopos [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Efthimios Harokopos wrote on Mar. 1, 2017 @ 20:13 GMT
Essay Abstract

In the first part of this paper I present a brief analysis of goal-oriented systems in the context of history and philosophy of science. In the second part I discuss their practical limitations. A fundamental question is considered in the first part: Do goal-oriented systems make sense in a universe that obeys relativity? I argue that in the block universe of relativity these systems lack intelligence because they are deterministic. Intelligent goal-oriented systems can be founded on a dual model of physical reality in which there is interaction between the phenomena and a mechanism that establishes causality. On this basis the existence of goal-oriented systems in a metaphysical sense is ultimately related to whether our physical reality is autonomous or guided by another level of reality. In the second part of the paper I claim that while goal-oriented systems may have served an important role in human evolution, they can also be highly dysfunctional. A simple mathematical model of multi-variable goal-oriented systems suggests that attaining goals may be impossible and this has significant implication for policy design.

Author Bio

Efthimios Harokopos received Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees from State University of New York at Buffalo with a minor in philosophy, a Master’s degree from Columbia University and completed the necessary coursework for a PhD while working for AT&T and Bell Labs. He is an independent researcher in the field of philosophy of science.

Download Essay PDF File




Andrew R. Scott wrote on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 14:08 GMT
I am going to have to try to read that again, but I think we are all rather stumbling around in the dark trying to discuss issues (aims, intention, control...) that we neither understand nor know if they actually exist.

report post as inappropriate

Author Efthimios Harokopos replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 14:35 GMT
Good point Andrew. What "exists" is subject of metaphysics. We can only make hypotheses about this ontology. Obviously mo one understands in detail how these things work and we are limited to approach the subject using epistemology. However, regardless of what exists and how it works, the reality of multi-variable systems is sobering. This is the important take away from my paper in my opinion....

view entire post




Harry Hamlin Ricker III replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 17:07 GMT
Hi, I think that this is a pretty good essay. I think that your theorem has some importance. The issue is, as I see it, is that the more we know in terms of facts the less we really understand. My conclusion from reading these essays is that as a human race, we are understanding less the more we think we know. Your theorem explains how that works. Thanks for your important essay.

report post as inappropriate

Author Efthimios Harokopos replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 17:18 GMT
Harry, thanks for the comment. I will try to support you corollary as follows: The more we get to know, the more complex systems we implement and the higher the probability of failure due to a left tail event.




Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 07:31 GMT
Nice essay Harokopos,

Your ideas and thinking are really excellent there is no free lunch.

1. I argue that in the block universe of relativity these systems lack intelligence because they are deterministic. Intelligent goal-oriented systems can be founded on a dual model of physical reality in which there is interaction between the phenomena and a mechanism that establishes causality...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 16:53 GMT
Dear Dr. Efthimios Harokopos,

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 Efthimios Harokopos replied on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 21:02 GMT
Thank you Joe. Your idea is interesting. I am in the process of reading your essay.




Willy K wrote on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 05:35 GMT
I think this is one of the finest essays I have read. You make a penetrating analysis of the problems brought on by big government. Your observations regarding the current state of large governments ring true to me. More to the point, the proposed solution sounds effective as well, “Decentralized control that deals with a limited number of inputs of maximum importance has higher probability of success”.

I am not sure what such a system should look like. My attempt to model intelligence of systems led me to construct a government model that you may want to check out. It focuses exclusively on protecting and enhancing the life of its citizens. I think the model is aligned with Ashby’s and Conant’s works, and therefore might also satisfy the demanding criterion that you have developed in your work.

Regards, Willy

report post as inappropriate

Author Efthimios Harokopos replied on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 21:12 GMT
Willy, thanks for your comments. I also believe that the focus on security is of highest rank. I just hope our civilization survives so it can get to the level of decentralization. Probability is low due to systemic risks imposed by centralized control.

Ref. Ashby's remarkable work, it is very challenging to determine the minimum controller of a system due to uncertainty, My point is that this is impossible for large-scale systems. Actually, any controller will fail. We have seen this in recent financial crisis. A new control variable was added, namely quantitative easing. Now this is also absorbed by complexity. Controllers are maybe possible for local, decentralized systems. A lot of work must be done. I by no means offered a solution. Just scratched the surface of the problem. Best.



Willy K replied on Mar. 14, 2017 @ 07:05 GMT
There are risks brought about by centralisation, but some of those risks are unavoidable if we are to stabilise at our current level of emergence. A collapse of the current nation state system would result in far greater chaos than anyone would want.

I think Ashby's work applies to any system that satisfies the condition of homeostasis. The size of the system is not that important. Rather than look at specific details like the QE, Ashby's work suggests that we look at the regulators that are responsible for stabilising the perturbations present in the system. QE is one of the possible responses they came up with. It is possible that the response was insufficient because the regulatory structure itself was incorrectly designed. At least, that's the line of thinking I am going with.

Your essay makes a fine contribution to the area, and therefore, I hold it in high esteem.

Kind Regards, Willy

report post as inappropriate


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 00:10 GMT
Dear Efthimios Harokopos,

Thank you for an exceptional essay. The 'autonomous' system as 'block' universe is hard for me to take seriously, and seems in some cases, as you may hint at, to have ulterior motives. I'm sure that I miss some of the finer philosophical points, but I miss nothing in your discussion of multi-variable goal-oriented systems. You reach the same conclusions that I earlier reached in 'the Thermodynamics of Freedom' only the problem has since become globally recognized, and reactions are occurring. From BRexit to Venezuela, the evidence is there but many avert their eyes as if the problem will just go away. It is inherent to the system.

I thank you again for a most meaningful essay. The front end shows the difficulties associated with over-simplistic universal schemes (no motion, block universe) while your back end illuminates the world appearing nightly on our TV screens (or round the clock on our iPads).

I hope that some point you might review my 2014 essay, The Thermodynamics of Freedom, but I invite you to read my current essay, which also focuses on social processes in science.

My very best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

Author Efthimios Harokopos replied on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 09:04 GMT
Thank you Edwin. It's surprising that each time someone comments about the merit of the essay, someone else give it a very low grade. My estimate was that after you made your comment I received a 2 that pushed back average from 5.3 to 4.9. I have made the proposal to the organizers to keep grades secret until the end of the contest. They should also consider having a panel to grade. The amount of totally unrelated essays is large and these people, who obviously missed the subject, are allowed to grade.

Anyway, I started reading your assay. It's very good as in 2014.. You have some unique ideas about the connection of thermodynamics to social science that worth further investigation.




Peter Jackson wrote on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 11:50 GMT
Efthimios,

Nice essay, interesting, original, very well written and argued. I think I followed most and agreed some, but nearing the scoring deadline I'm now down to speed reading, so may have missed some meaning.

I question; "goal oriented systems make sense only if there is causality

if physical reality at the level of macrocosm is autonomous, then there are no random mutations because everything is deterministic"


because I derive a random mutation mechanism in my essay which is entirely causal, though not entirely deterministic. It also produces a 'quasi' classical QM compliant with Bell via dynamic geometry. I hope you may get the chance to read and challenge or analyse it in terms of your thesis (but don't try to speed read it as it's quite dense!).

Must dash, I'm late for a free lunch (It'll probably be all gone then!) I'm not sure what the 4.2 is about, but it seems few read it. Score boost coming in 10 secs so hold on tight.

Very best

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Author Efthimios Harokopos replied on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 17:58 GMT
Peter,

Thank you. I will read your essay carefully. I dealt with causality at the macrocosm level because how this macrocosm arises from quantum microcosm is not entirely clear. I will read your essay slowly and carefully and I am sure I will learn many new things.

Efthimios




Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 09:48 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

Author Efthimios Harokopos replied on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 18:00 GMT
Dizhechko ,

I will read your essay with great interest. Thanks for your pointer.

Efthimios




Linna Landau wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 10:09 GMT
I am sorry we weren't taught it properly in school or in college. Now I lack knowledge to write my research paper .

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

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