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

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 19:18pm UTC, wrote Dear Gene, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

Michael Helland: on 8/7/13 at 16:33pm UTC, wrote I just rated your essay a ten to give you a boost. I hope you like mine...

Richard Kingsley-Nixey: on 8/7/13 at 12:35pm UTC, wrote Gene, Super essay, real science, and worth a higher place. Have you read...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/6/13 at 0:49am UTC, wrote Dear Gene, We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at the...

Antony Ryan: on 8/3/13 at 19:35pm UTC, wrote Hello Gene, I've lost a lot of comments and replies on my thread and many...

Antony Ryan: on 8/2/13 at 12:06pm UTC, wrote Dear Gene, I've re-read your essay and now rated - top marks! Please take...

Akinbo Ojo: on 7/31/13 at 13:41pm UTC, wrote Hello Gene, An informative essay. And I agree Mother Nature is adept at...

Peter Jackson: on 7/30/13 at 17:17pm UTC, wrote Gene, Great to read an essay actually based on evidence and analysing real...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Michael Hussey: "https://www.google.com" in New Nuclear "Magic...

Michael Hussey: "it is really difficult to understand what is all about all the things..." in New Nuclear "Magic...

Stefan Weckbach: "I have a problem with the notion of time in the multiverse scenario that..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Agnew: "It is interesting that you bring up change in the context of free..." in Cosmological Koans

Roger Granet: "By the way, this post was from Roger." in First Things First: The...

david john: "https://www.google.com google.com/ google.com/" in Black Hole Photographed...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Lorraine Ford: "Physics has failed to explain change: physics tries to claim that change is..." in Cosmological Koans


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
July 17, 2019

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

Author Gene H Barbee wrote on May. 10, 2013 @ 17:06 GMT
Essay Abstract

Feynman’s quantum mechanical equation for absorption of light leads to a sharp response as wavelength matching occurs. It appears that our sensory system utilizes this equation and a model of color vision is demonstrated that agrees well with the measured color sensitivity in humans. The manner in which color responses add together into meaningful perception supports the author’s view that nature is based on specific information theory probabilities described in the author’s FQXi essay [1]. It is speculated that life is an emergent property of chemicals that absorb energy and use information.

Author Bio

Mechanical Engineer, Atomic Energy Commission, Aerospace company engineer, R&D Scientist for 35 years and Scientific Research Council member Eastman Kodak, lifelong learner

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author Gene H Barbee wrote on May. 10, 2013 @ 23:20 GMT
Two references have been updated since last June's essay contest. The post entitled "Application of proton model to cosmology" contains a new appendix entitled "Why critical density from H^2=8/3 pi G rhoc is incorrect". The author concludes from this that there is neither missing mass nor dark energy.

attachments: Application_of_proton_mass_model_to_cosmology.pdf, A_topdown_approach_to_fundamental_forces.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on May. 11, 2013 @ 16:16 GMT
Gene,

What is the point of your essay? You seem to have copied and pasted research information about some fabricated light experiments quite skillfully, but what has that to do with reality? As I have carefully explained in my essay BITTERS, the Universe is eternally occurring once. Stars have been emitting light eternally. The Universe has been filled with light eternally. Do you not suspect that you just might be exaggerating a little bit when you state that “The manner in which color responses add together into meaningful perception supports the author’s view that nature is based on (your own) specific information theory probabilities” (sic) ?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Gene H Barbee wrote on May. 12, 2013 @ 03:14 GMT
Your emphasis on one eternal reality would seem presumptive to those who have pointed out that the only we access reality is through our senses. For example, what we call reality is not really colored at all, there might be wavelengths of light entering our eyes but our brain assigns color. The content of our mind is information about reality. Information theory and thermodynamics are sciences that help us understand. I explored the possibility that information and energy are intimately related and looked for an example where information theory was active and quantifiable. Color vision was interesting because it contained elements of quantum mechanics and information theory.

The value of an essay like mine might be to understand the brain’s operation well enough to connect sensors to our brain and give unsighted persons sight.

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on May. 12, 2013 @ 15:17 GMT
Gene,

My reality is uniquely colorful. You of course have the right to call reality anything you like, but please do not take it for granted that everybody automatically shares your view. As I recall, the sensory deprivation experiments that were carried out on some individuals did not affect in any way whatsoever the color scheme apprehension of those individuals while they were actually undergoing deprivation or afterwards, when they were recovering. Their dreams became more intense as did their delusions, but their dreams and delusions did not turn into black and white fantasies.

My brain operates quite well. Why are you trying to "understand" how an abstract brain operates?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anthony DiCarlo wrote on May. 30, 2013 @ 15:21 GMT
Gene,

You are "almost there" in that your title "It from Information" would have been more precise should you have replaced "it" with the word "life." You then go on to discern how information from vision is physically characterized(vision being one degree of information freedom for life). As the CARINNE PIEKEMA • Feb 20, 2013 article reads, smell can also be physically characterized, and now, we have an acoustic path to information entering a taste/smell bud.

Is it possible that all physical roads that lead to gaining information also lead back to the concious observer? This would seem inevidable ... and was concluded as such on my last two essays. Science has come full circle and now the arrow points back at us ... time to physically describe this arrow that fractures into the nature of our physical senses - the physical strings of information that feed life possibly being the same strings of information we stumbled upon in attempting to describe the smallest of the small ... from the electronic shell information to that information from within the nucleus .... life information... for it contains all we can ever hope to physically measure in our concious state of being!

Regards,

Tony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Gene H Barbee replied on May. 31, 2013 @ 03:33 GMT
Thanks Tony, I enjoyed your comments. We are definitely thinking along the same lines. As you noted, there are different interpretations of what "It" was in the essay challenge. Some contributors like you and I think "It" refers to life while others think "It" refers to the physical universe. I agree that the observer is fundamental and we must come full circle and identify how we participate in using information that everything consists of. I will read your reference and essay.

If you are interested in Cosmology, read my new papers posted May 30.

Bookmark and Share



Author Gene H Barbee wrote on May. 31, 2013 @ 03:16 GMT
A new paper entitled "Kinetic and potential energy during expansion" is being posted. The paper concludes that there is no dark energy but there is dark matter. The kinetic/potential energy analysis shows that there are as many dark particles of proton like mass as there are protons. Further information cautioning the use of 8/3 pi G rhoc is presented.

For reference, the June 2012 FQXI post entitled "Application of proton mass model to cosmology" is also updated and posted.

attachments: Kinetic_and_potential_energy_during_expansion.pdf, 1_Application_of_proton_mass_model_to_cosmology.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Author Gene H Barbee wrote on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 15:11 GMT
Tony, thanks for referring me to the Corrine Piekema article. I didn’t know there were studies being carried out in quantum biology. It was interesting that a molecule can be read as a fragrance by reading the frequency of the bonds. As you inferred this is related to my proposal that the frequency of light is read by Feynman’s Psi function. The key point to me is that the Psi function translates the frequency to an information code (a probability or N in my work) that the brain can act on. I had not appreciated the value of Psi being entangled (robin navigation example and leaf photosynthesis example). Although the brain is much more than a computer it may need a uniform code to create meanings from so many inputs.

The following work was done in response to a question posted in the June 2012 FQXI contest and modified in response to your interest.

attachments: Post_for_Tony.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Author Gene H Barbee wrote on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 21:35 GMT
A new paper entitled comments on quantum gravity and black holes is posted below along with an updated version of a paper entitled Kinetic and potential energy during expansion. I have referred to these papers in other posts and wanted them to be more accessible.

attachments: 1_Comments_about_Quantum_gravity_and_about_black_holes.pdf, 2_Kinetic_and_potential_energy_during_expansion.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 05:21 GMT
Dear Gene

"It from information" is also my conclusion, though happy with many different methods, but we have the same result.

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 03:56 GMT
Send to all of you

THE ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AND A SMALL TEST FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT

To change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition and to demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay and to avoid duplicate questions after receiving the opinion of you , I will add a reply to you :

1 . THE...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:57 GMT
Gene,

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


Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 06:17 GMT
Dear Gene,

I think you have approached this from a very good viewpoint, after all we are observers. Life emerging from chemicals and energy can't be refuted. I think too that information that we perceive is a culmination of multiple other sources, and colour highlights this perfectly.

Great essay! If you get chance please read mine, though I appreciate there are many in the contest.

All the best,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


WANG Xiong wrote on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 13:54 GMT
Dear Gene H Barbee,

Thanks for your nice essay, well done

I enjoy reading it and rate it accordingly

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


Yuri Danoyan wrote on Jul. 19, 2013 @ 16:13 GMT
“The average human being is a naive realist: i.e., like the animals, he accepts his sense impressions as direct information of reality and he is convinced that all human beings share this information. He is not aware that no way exist of establishing whether one individual impression (e.g. ,of a green tree) and that of another (of this tree) is the same and that even the word “same” has no meaning here.”

Max Born My life & my views p.53

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 04:57 GMT
Hello Gene,

I'm enjoying your essay so far. I agree that it is indeed relevant to know how it is that the brain sorts things out, in order to see how nature operates, because after all brains evolved to fit the specific perceptual demands of physical reality - and in a sense, it provides us with the other side of the same coin. At the 10th Frontiers of Fundamental Physics conference, there was a lecture by Helmut Kröger about 'Binocular rivalry.." in vision, and how the domains of left eye and right eye perception are formed and then change when one pattern is switched. I think I can locate and post the paper.

So while I did wonder at the start of your paper how some of it relates back to the "It from Bit" question and Physics, I think I can see that it does indeed apply - and I'll comment further when I'm done reading. But it's 1 AM here and I think I need some sleep before I continue.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 05:12 GMT
Seeing I was more than half done..

I went ahead and finished reading, and then rated your essay highly. Perhaps you can read my essay when you get the chance.

Have Fun!

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Gene H Barbee replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 19:32 GMT
Hi Jonathan,

Thanks for your comments. I read your essay also and found it deep and thought provoking. My essay from last year “cracked the information code” and found that energy and information (N) were related by N=-ln P. N for various particles found in nature was identified and in this system a dimensionless energy ratio (E/e0) is just the inverse of probability P. In other words E=eo*exp(N). This years essay takes the thoughts one step further and attempts to understand how life develops in the information/energy structure. I agree with you that there is interplay between information and energy. I watched my grandchildren’s intellect “come on line” and join the information side of the structure. The differentiator for me is this definition of intelligence. Intelligence is “seeing differences” and I think I see evidence of information differences being created in the code. This makes me think that the information side came first.

By the way, thanks for your blog regarding SK Kauffmann’s paper. I had a good dialog with him by email. He is classically trained but my arguments and his analysis resulted in a paper posted on vixra.org/cosrel 1307.0085 entitled “The case for a low energy gravitational scale”. Last year’s essay is updated and posted as 1307.0082.

Gene Barbee

Bookmark and Share


Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 22:04 GMT
Thanks for your reply.

I'm happy you got to see your grandchildren 'come on line' intellectually. That is really cool to watch. Much less fun was to see my Mom's intellect unravel over time, due to the effects of Alzheimer's (an she passed away in May), but it was educational in a way to see how one of the first things to disappear was the capacity to gauge, time, size, and distance. Without this capacity; cognition has nothing to latch on to and no way to re-calibrate. Very sad...

From what I know; it is mainly the left brain that is focused on seeing differences, while the right more sees commonalities. One paper of mine still unfinished talks about this in terms of the two hemispheres doing the same thing in opposite directions of time. While one likes to take things apart to see the pieces, the other likes to assemble them and sees how the parts relate. That is; putting a watch together and taking it apart are the same operation, but in reverse direction of process evolution.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 17:17 GMT
Gene,

Great to read an essay actually based on evidence and analysing real interactions. I was starting to think I was alone! QM has abandoned any such 'messy' dealings, and the other pair in the triumvirate; particle physics and quantum optics, leave a theoretical vacuum at the centre only work such as yours can let us address.

I was also stunned to find; "it is thought that the brain operates on Bayesian probabilities" (Brockman) which incorporates two ("radical" I thought!) main spars in the ontological construction I build in my own essay. I also particularly agree the importance of;

"The other hues are comprised of combinations of these colors without full spectrums and it clear that the brain is adept at creating meanings from these curves."..."Partially processed signals from the retina go into the brain where a great deal of processing takes place...the nerves convey ions and it is clear from the connections that signals are added and subtracted."

Also; "the signals to be processed are probabilities.", ..."...ions leave the eye and are transported along the axion taking the value of the normalized wavelength (probability) and its intensity to the brain." ..."The brains task is to assign meanings to new data signals based on stored information... p(H) (the prior belief and expected signal value)..." etc.

I suggest there is a critical relation the brain gets wrong! confusing time and speed in the approach medium with speed in the axion, including by not consistently using lambda instead of 'frequency'. My last years essay also addressed the point. I do hope you'll read and comment on this years.

As for yours, thank you, and brilliantly well done. Top marks due and well earned.

Best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 13:41 GMT
Hello Gene,

An informative essay. And I agree Mother Nature is adept at building complex systems from information. In my essay I report my suspicion that Nature has been doing just that using the discrete units of space and the binary information, existence/non-existence.

Following additional insights gained from interacting with FQXi community members, perhaps you will like to view the judgement in the case of Atomistic Enterprises Inc. vs. Plato & Ors delivered on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 11:39 GMT. Thanks

All the best,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 12:06 GMT
Dear Gene,

I've re-read your essay and now rated - top marks! Please take a look at mine if you get chance.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Aug. 3, 2013 @ 19:35 GMT
Hello Gene,

I've lost a lot of comments and replies on my thread and many other threads I have commented on over the last few days. This has been a lot of work and I feel like it has been a waste of time and energy. Seems to have happened to others too - if not all.

I WILL ATTEMPT to revisit all threads to check and re-post something. Your thread was one affected by this.

I can't remember the full extent of what I said, but I have notes so know that I rated it very highly.

Hopefully the posts will be able to be retrieved by FQXi.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 00:49 GMT
Dear Gene,

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


Richard William Kingsley-Nixey wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 12:35 GMT
Gene,

Super essay, real science, and worth a higher place. Have you read Peter Jackson's, which is complimentary and shows the important results of understanding optics.

Richard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michael Helland wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 16:33 GMT
I just rated your essay a ten to give you a boost.

I hope you like mine too

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1616

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 19:18 GMT
Dear Gene,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

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).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

Bookmark and Share
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.