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

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

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 Fund.
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

Kimmo Rouvari: on 8/8/13 at 3:03am UTC, wrote "Does it fit ToEBi?" Your essay contains so fine language that it's going...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 18:15pm UTC, wrote Kimmo - a provocative essay. Initially I thought ToEBi was a...

Kimmo Rouvari: on 8/7/13 at 6:34am UTC, wrote Surely we can say that an electron isn't the wave function but naturally...

Kimmo Rouvari: on 8/6/13 at 19:46pm UTC, wrote I'll give a proper answer to your question tomorrow. There is plenty of...

Kimmo Rouvari: on 8/6/13 at 19:42pm UTC, wrote I have already read/rated Marcoen's essay and I liked it too.

George Kirakosyan: on 8/6/13 at 18:55pm UTC, wrote I will read Dear Kimmo. And I advise you Marcoen's work which is one...

Marcoen Cabbolet: on 8/6/13 at 17:59pm UTC, wrote Kimmo, I have read and rated your essay. I admire your enthousiasm. There...

Anonymous: on 8/6/13 at 11:49am UTC, wrote "Frankly, I think your own analysis of reality would accommodate...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "Isn't symmetry simply closely related to redundancy even if physicist may..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Robert Rise: "Meet many types of women on ihookup. Some dates better than others. It is..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Steve Dufourny: "FQXI you too I need your help, come all too we have a work to do there..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "lol REVOLUTION SPHERISATION everywhere at all scales,REVOLUTION..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "The kind of time required, over which the material change is happening, (to..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "after all like Borh has made,this universe and its spheres for me are like..." in Alternative Models of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 23, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: It From Bit or Bit From It? by Kimmo Rouvari [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Kimmo Rouvari wrote on Apr. 19, 2013 @ 10:09 GMT
Essay Abstract

In order to really know the answer we have to take a look at behind the curtain. What curtain? And what should we see? The curtain is current understanding and knowledge in particle physics and behind the curtain lays bare naked truth of the nature. We are ready to rip off the curtain.

Author Bio

Independent researcher. Main interest areas are theory of everything and antimatter.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Paul Reed wrote on Apr. 19, 2013 @ 19:07 GMT
“The essence of information depends solely on ones perspective”

But in science we are not interested in perspectives, just one reference, ie what exists, as far as we can know.

“Obviously there is reality for us human beings, which, in fact, is a

very broad and complex one. For a simpler life form, reality is something else…”

Not so. The perception of reality is different, not the reality.

“What makes realities different for this simpler life form and a plain rock?”

Nothing, the reality is the same. The rock just cannot process physical input received into any form of perception, ie it has no form of awareness of reality.



Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Apr. 19, 2013 @ 19:37 GMT
I have a bit different views on those issues what you wrote about. To me, the reality is depended on who's experiencing it. Maybe a better term would be a subjective reality.

Bookmark and Share


Paul Reed replied on Apr. 20, 2013 @ 05:52 GMT
Kimmo

It would be a better term. The point being it is not the reality, there is only one.

Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 20, 2013 @ 16:19 GMT
This is a very well written essay about abstract information. Unfortunately, the essay dwells too fondly on the perfection of invisibility. Invisible fabricated particles behave flawlessly in assembling in such a cogent fashion; fabricated electronic instruments can easily detect and record all of their intent. Why certain electromagnetic chemical reactions would willingly choose to modestly operate in a simple life form solely for the perceived purpose of placating the curiosity of a different bundle of electromagnetic chemical reactions pulsating away in the brain of a physicist is not adequately explained.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Apr. 20, 2013 @ 16:41 GMT
Thanks for your comment!

I wish I had the knowledge regarding the secrets of human brain. That's just over my league.

Bookmark and Share



Philip Gibbs wrote on Apr. 20, 2013 @ 21:02 GMT
Kimmo, nice essay, hope you do well.

So It and Bit are the same thing in your view. Does that mean that neither is fundamental, or that both are?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Apr. 21, 2013 @ 03:59 GMT
This is a trick question, right? :) Seriously speaking they are the same thing so they are also equally fundamental. Everything in our universe is made of elementary particles. Even elementary particle's existence (IT) has a story to tell (BIT).

Bookmark and Share



Author Kimmo Rouvari wrote on Apr. 21, 2013 @ 04:45 GMT
I want to remind that underlying theory (Theory of Everything by illusion; ToEbi) is easily testable with the modified Cavendish experiment. In ToEbi paper there is a reference into the actual experiment results. What else you can wish from TOE?

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 08:11 GMT
Hello, Kimmo,

Yes, you're absolutely right: Drawn conclusions are just totally wrong.

You have a very interesting, non-trivial view of reality, its structure and the nature of the information. I wish you success, Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 08:45 GMT
Thank you very much! Compliments are rare treat :)

Bookmark and Share


Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 09:11 GMT
Kimmo,

See also my essay. You see, maybe something in common. I am sure that the new information age requires new concepts and new constructs to build a unified picture of an essentially sound worlds for physicists and lyrics. Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:01 GMT
Kimmo,

Fascinating essay, original and very 'real'. I also think I may have actually employed something like the Rouvari effect to great effect in my own essay!

I particularly agree; "interaction is stored in form of rotation frequency and rotation axis orientation changes, into the interacting objects."

I certainly also derive and apply the rotational axis, and, adding translation on the axis, also discuss the 'helix' described. This proves important in resolving the EPR paradox. I think your;

"In case of two, same spin, particles meet in appropriate conditions they process that information by precessing until they have reached parallel rotation axis orientation. End state of this process is a stored information in form of new spinning rates and spin axis orientations of particles involved."

Is a very good description. I also extract some implicit subtleties of 'charge density'. Then I was really impressed with your phrase consistent with my 'information channel' from 'detector' to 'processor' (brain);

"when receptors in an eye process photon information with certain energy, it releases a small current into a ones brains. Brains receive the information in form of electric current but how the brains store that information? Only option is to change brains structure and that's really happening when brains store information."

But of course brains also "process", so analyse and derive conclusions. Which is where I suggest it all goes wrong!!

Long live reality! Good bit of ripping down nonsense curtains. I think it deserves to be higher up the list and have you marked down for a much better score. Have you given a definitive concise definition of your 'effect'? I hope I've helped rip down more of the curtain some areas so hope you can read my essay. I'm pretty sure is resolves the EPR paradox! But reality doesn't seem yet entirely in fashion.

Well done and best of luck

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 04:08 GMT
Hi Peter,

I'll read your essay in the near future. Rouvari Effect needs some enhancement still. I have to remove an oxide film before I can get really accurate results. Current radiation rates are not due to gamma radiation. Some sort of magnetic pulses induce those measured ticks.

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 11:10 GMT
Kimmo,

I suspect and hope you may just find a hint from the processes discussed in my essay. I hope you get to read and like it as it needs all the points it can get! I've just added yours, which you can rest assured were far more than the very mean score below. Experimentation is important and your finding may be very important.

I don't think co-incident views should be an important factor in scoring, and also think most scoring is far too low to reflect the quality and value of essays. Do please let me know if you think my findings may help reveal any insights.

Very best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 07:28 GMT
Dear Kimmo Rouvari

It's interesting to see your essay, unfortunately we did not have the same perspective.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 07:34 GMT
Give you 3 points as score you are .

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jun. 23, 2013 @ 20:52 GMT
Hi Kimmo,

I like the use of the word curtain and the fact you talk about observation. You may (or may not be) interested in my essay which also looks at observation at and beyond event horizons. We may have some common ground?

I think you have paid good attention to the essay guidelines in your different sections - making it very relevant.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 01:47 GMT
Kimmo,

If information and particles are the same, what is the role of consciousness. That would mean that humans are information and atoms.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 03:59 GMT
Hi James,

Information and particles are not the same BUT they are inseparable. Consciousness... that's a really tough one. To be honest, I can't tell. Would it be possible to live without it? Yes. But our world would look a different place for sure :)

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 01:58 GMT
Dear Kimmo

Your image of a ripped curtain behind which the truth of a new physics is revealed is wonderful (even Hitchcock used it in his movie "Torn Curtain" also involving pohysics!). In my fqxi essay I used the image of a Cloud to show how we make mistakes in observing reality and making theories about it.

Your essay is based on your interesting ToEbi which I also looked at in vixra. Your theory has some interesting similarities to my own 2005 Beautiful Universe Theory also found here where the basis is the exchange of angular momentum in an ether lattice. There are differences too, because there is no 'collision' in my model. In either case I know how difficult it is to convince mainline physicists to start thinking along new lines. I wish you the best of luck

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 03:20 GMT
In case you have looked my latest viXra.org version you should check the latest draft from here. It's simplified, includes the mass and the mechanism behind relativity.

I'm also more than sure that ToEbi will change the paradigm in physics. It only requires that one nation declares building an antimatter bomb. Chinese and Russians have been very active around ToEbi...

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:36 GMT
Kimmo,

If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, “It’s good to be the king,” is serious about our subject.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 01:46 GMT
Dear Kimmo. Hello Apologies if this does not apply to you. I have read and rated your essay and about 50 others. If you have not read, or did not rate my essay The Cloud of Unknowing please consider doing so. With best wishes.

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


WANG Xiong wrote on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 13:48 GMT
Dear Kimmo Rouvari ,

Thanks for your nice essay, well done

I enjoy reading it and rate it accordingly

In order to really know the answer we have to take a look at behind the curtain. What curtain? And what should we see? The curtain is current understanding and knowledge in particle physics and behind the curtain lays bare naked truth of the nature. We are ready to rip off the curtain.

what is the main idea to rip off the curtain? to understand information?

and from a different point view, my essay may interest you

Bit: from Breaking symmetry of it

Hope you enjoy it

Regards,

Xiong

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Jul. 19, 2013 @ 06:22 GMT
In order to really understand nature (and information) you have to rip off the curtain. I'll read your essay.

Bookmark and Share



Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 04:08 GMT
Kimmo,

I truly enjoyed your insight and analogies. I most certainly agree, it is time to rip off the curtains and dig deeper. Although you have a different approach than I do, I found your essay inspiring and most worthy of merit.

I wish you the best of luck.

Regards,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 02:52 GMT
Dear Kimmo,

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest,

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Sreenath B N replied on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 06:31 GMT
Dear Kimmo Rouvari,

In your brief article you have clearly stated what you want to say regarding the current topic of the essay, that is, It from Bit or Bit from It. You have, through your rigorous logical argument established the relationship between It and Bit by saying ultimately that “It is Bit and Bit is It”. This is also the conclusion reached by me by different arguments when I say “Bit comes from It but mind can know of It only through Bit”. This is also what is told by you when you say “increase in information correspondingly increases the complexity of reality.

Thanks for your elegantly argued article and hence I would like to rate it with maximum score. Please also go through my essay (http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827) and express your comments on it in my thread.

Best wishes,

Sreenath

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 07:30 GMT
I'm going to read your essay in couple of days! And thank you for your rating.

Bookmark and Share



Dipak Kumar Bhunia wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 06:21 GMT
Dear Kimmo,

Thanks for your essay and I think that we are almost rush towards the same directions. I can quote from your last lines: "From now on, it's meaningless to ask: It From Bit or Bit From It? It is Bit and Bit is It". That is "It" and "Bit" are fundamentally inseparable.

I invite you to my essay (http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1855)and incidentally I conclude there: "Therefore, ‘it from bit’ and ‘bit from it’ is just a depiction of the same digital nature on a mirror".

With regards

Dipak

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 17:39 GMT
Hi dear Kimmo,

Your essay is interesting in many aspects. Particularly I felt that you clearly dividing the abstract information from real source of information. And the real object is indivisible from its real properties/attributes, which we representing abstractly in different ways (particularly as encoded form of ,,bits,, as well) So, for every healthy man must be clear that concept of ,,information,, is a human creation only. Thus, the intention to build something real from ,,bits,, it will be an incredible absurd. I think you can be agreeing with me because this conclusion is follow from your position as well. If you have no objection then I think we are the adherents and just we must support each to other. I am inclined to rate your essay high, if you find that we really have common points. Hope soon get your response. Essay text

Sincerely,

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 19:19 GMT
I downloaded your essay and I'm going to read/rate it tomorrow. After two pages what I read few minutes ago it looked very promising indeed!

Bookmark and Share



eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 23:31 GMT
Dear Kimmo,

We are at the end of this essay contest.

In conclusion, at the question to know if Information is more fundamental than Matter, there is a good reason to answer that Matter is made of an amazing mixture of eInfo and eEnergy, at the same time.

Matter is thus eInfo made with eEnergy rather than answer it is made with eEnergy and eInfo ; because eInfo is eEnergy, and the one does not go without the other one.

eEnergy and eInfo are the two basic Principles of the eUniverse. Nothing can exist if it is not eEnergy, and any object is eInfo, and therefore eEnergy.

And consequently our eReality is eInfo made with eEnergy. And the final verdict is : eReality is virtual, and virtuality is our fundamental eReality.

Good luck to the winners,

And see you soon, with good news on this topic, and the Theory of Everything.

Amazigh H.

I rated your essay.

Please visit My essay.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Margriet Anne O'Regan wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 23:33 GMT
Hello Kimmo from Margriet O'Regan !

As I personally enjoy ideas that challenge the mainstream your essay was a great read for me.

My own investigations have led me to conclude that ‘information’ is NOT digits – no kind nor amount of them (including any that can be extracted from quantum phenomena!), nor how algorithmically-well they may be massaged & shunted through any device...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 11:49 GMT
"Frankly, I think your own analysis of reality would accommodate 'geometrical-objects-as-units-of-information' particularly well !!!!!"

Mmm... interesting thought, I'll think about it.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 03:29 GMT
Kimmo

yours was a fun essay to read. I especially enjoyed your tone. You wrote it in a good mood and with a smile on your face ..and it shows :) And yeah, the content was very agreeable to me too (xcept the antimatter in the end, but what do I know)

Thanks,

-Marina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 07:24 GMT
Thank you Marina!

Don't mind the antimatter part... its time is ahead of us, not yet.

Bookmark and Share



George Kirakosyan wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 05:48 GMT
Greetings Dear Kimmo!

Thank you for support and your interest to my work

in vixra.org. I am very hope that you will find some useful things there.

Glad for cooperation with you.

All the Best for you,

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 11:22 GMT
I'm currently reading your "Rethinking the Formal Methodology (I):

Wave-Vortex Essence of the Substance" paper. You should read the latest version of ToEbi here. We have quite similar ideas on nature.

Bookmark and Share


George Kirakosyan replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 18:55 GMT
I will read Dear Kimmo.

And I advise you Marcoen's work which is one honestly critical work.

I hope you will appreciate it properly!!

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 19:42 GMT
I have already read/rated Marcoen's essay and I liked it too.

Bookmark and Share



Marcoen J.T.F. Cabbolet wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 17:59 GMT
Kimmo,

I have read and rated your essay. I admire your enthousiasm.

There is one question, though. In quantum mechanics (QM), the wave function is a primitive notion. If we have the wave function of an electron, then it is not the case that the electron 'is' the wave function: it is merely the case that the wave function contains all information about the electron. If we want to extract that information, then we can perform all kinds of mathematical manipulations on the wave function: this yields statistical predictions about the outcome of measurements on our electron.

In your theory, however, you say that material objects and information are one and the same (pages 2 and 4: "It is Bit and Bit is It"). Now suppose I have an electron in a box. Then what is the information that the electron 'is', and how do I get to know the information?

Best regards,

Marcoen

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 19:46 GMT
I'll give a proper answer to your question tomorrow. There is plenty of information in the case you presented...

Bookmark and Share


Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 06:34 GMT
Surely we can say that an electron isn't the wave function but naturally there won't be the wave function without an electron hence bit is it and vice versa. Let's focus on the question you made.

First of all, we have an electron. Its mere existence is an information. It's an elementary particle. Based on how other elementary particles like photons or neutrinos are created (according to ToEbi) we can say that electrons are created within a high density of FTEPs. Because the great amount of electrons there has been a circumstances where this caliber creation volume can happen, The Big Bang it is.

Back to the box... because the high spinning rate of an electron it's highly unlikely that our electron is stationary in the box. It's just bouncing around (depending of course on wall material). Each contact with the walls reveals more information in form of photons. By tracking these trails we get a pretty good information on the velocity, energy, spinning rate, spinning orientation and path of the electron, within Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

Did my answer help at all?

Bookmark and Share



Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 18:15 GMT
Kimmo - a provocative essay. Initially I thought ToEBi was a tongue-in-cheek jab at the empiricists in physics, but then as I read more of your paper I realized it was more serious than that. Nice set of ideas; easy to understand high level explanation, but with some potential depth.

I wonder how you might incorporate the illusion of time in your approach? You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-
V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

Does it fit ToEBi?

Kind regards, Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Kimmo Rouvari replied on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 03:03 GMT
"Does it fit ToEBi?"

Your essay contains so fine language that it's going to take few moments to comprehend. So I can't answer your question at this point. Anyway, good luck to the final! :)

Bookmark and Share



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.