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

George Kirakosyan: on 8/10/13 at 5:23am UTC, wrote Dear Paul, Many thanks for your detailed comments to my work and for your...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 21:50pm UTC, wrote Dear Paul, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

Peter Jackson: on 8/6/13 at 20:16pm UTC, wrote Paul, Just reviewing for final scoring and found I'd missed the above. I...

Antony Ryan: on 8/5/13 at 14:13pm UTC, wrote Hello Paul, Thanks for the reply above. I've rated your essay now highly...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/4/13 at 19:24pm UTC, wrote Dear Paul We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at the...

Antony Ryan: on 8/4/13 at 1:49am UTC, wrote Dear Paul, Many thanks for these very well thought out points. I'll take...

Paul Butler: on 8/2/13 at 18:23pm UTC, wrote Dear Akinbo, I sent this comment yesterday and it appeared on my page, but...

Paul Butler: on 8/2/13 at 0:02am UTC, wrote Dear Akinbo, Thank you for your positive comments about my paper. I have...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Lorraine Ford: "With the “A.I. Feynman” software, Silviu-Marian Udrescu and Max Tegmark..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Georgina Woodward: "Coin toss co-state potentials: With the measurement protocol decided, in..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Steve, Sabine Hossenffelder has written an interesting blog post on her..." in Alternative Models of...

Steve Dufourny: "If we correlate with the consciousness, can we consider that all is..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Ian Durham, Maybe still for the rankings and the links with this..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Steve Dufourny: "Georgina,in the past we have discussed about this Fith force after the 3..." in Alternative Models of...

Steve Dufourny: "An other point very important considering this nature.Ecology is so..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

janey hug: "Vape Juice Wholesale When it pertains to vape juice, you require to obtain..." in Ed Witten on the Nature...


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 22, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: Basic Information Structuring by Paul N Butler [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Paul N Butler wrote on May. 22, 2013 @ 17:07 GMT
Essay Abstract

Information Structuring, as the name implies, covers the essence and structure of various types of information and interactions between information entities. I have titled the paper that I submitted “Basic Information Structuring”, but because of the short allowed format of these papers it might have been better called “A Summary of Basic Information Structuring”. I hope I have been able to include enough detail to give an adequate sense of the subject to encourage others to expand on it.

Author Bio

The author has long studied the source, nature, and functioning of the universe that we live in. Information is built into and is intricately woven into the structure of the universe and all entities that exist within it. The author is, therefore, pleased to have the opportunity to expound on the subject of Information Structuring.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



basudeba mishra wrote on May. 26, 2013 @ 10:41 GMT
Dear Sir,

Your essay is very interesting and thought provoking. We wish you should have broken it into smaller paragraphs and given examples at each stage.

Your internal structural information can be compared to a quantum or a letter of the alphabet and external relational information can be compared to other quantum and macro objects and words or sentences. The creation began with...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on May. 26, 2013 @ 17:51 GMT
Dear Joe,

I am sorry that I did not provide more in the way of examples to support some things provided in my paper, but as you mentioned the short maximum size of the papers forced me to choose to provide very little breadth of the types of information with greater depth of detail about each type that was provided or to provide greater breadth of more types of information with each...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on May. 29, 2013 @ 01:50 GMT
Dear Basudeba,

Thank you for your comment that my paper is interesting and thought provoking. That is my intent in providing the information that is contained in all of the papers that I have provided in this world. It is never provided just to try to fit into the current scientific mold to win a prize, etc., but is intended to provoke others to expand their thinking beyond current...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


basudeba mishra replied on May. 29, 2013 @ 06:15 GMT
Dear Sir,

We convey the universality – hence plurality of consciousness. The letter we wrote has been understood by you exactly as we intended. This similarity comes only from the deep underlying unity of information (consciousness). Since no two things are fully similar, and two people cannot see an identical thing unless they are looking at a common thing, both of us must be sharing the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jun. 4, 2013 @ 10:33 GMT
Dear Basudeba,

There are indeed many conscious beings in the universe and each varies in ability according to its purpose. Unity of information does not come within their plurality, however, but rather division comes because of the lack of complete information placed within all of them to limit them that they might come to the only true source of unity. The consciousness that I share...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


basudeba mishra replied on Jun. 6, 2013 @ 15:50 GMT
Dear Sir,

We agree with the first part of your post and generally agree with the rest except two points.

It is true that the universe has a beginning and an end. But it has to start all over again because of two reasons. Firstly, if it is once in a life time occurrence, the question how and why it all started needs to be answered and we have no answers. Though this does not prove its...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 4, 2013 @ 15:32 GMT
Paul,

It was hard work to read, but no more than mine I expect, and worth the effort. I think you have some particularly good insights with for instance;

"From the observation of external relational information it is evident that this universe is constructed in many hierarchical structural levels that we can detect"

Now as you may expect this and the below resonate greatly with my own findings;

"An abstract written language begins at its lowest level with symbols that have either no or at least a very limited meaning in themselves." and "No matter how high you go up in the hierarchical information structure, man's abstract languages remain abstract."(yes, including maths!). And in particular;

"Real information is that based on that which exists and can be demonstrated through interaction relational information. Unreal information is that which cannot be demonstrated through interaction relational information."

Spot on. And I go on to derive some pretty radical implications! But, as you say;

because they have much of their credibility and/or current income tied up in the continuation of mainstream belief in that theory, they attempt to suppress the dissemination of the failure(s) of the theory to match all known relational information, while at the same time they try to emphasize all areas where such a theory agrees with the relational information. This purposeful distortion of the information is basically a form of a lie because its purpose is to deceive others and it can inhibit investigation into why such information does not agree with the theory,"

Yours may not end up a winner, but for me that alone has you marked down for a far better score than at present! I hope you enjoy mine, which also gives many proofs (I desperately need a far better score too!!)

Best of luck.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
post approved


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jun. 8, 2013 @ 18:53 GMT
Dear Peter,

Thank you for your support of some of the concepts in my paper. Of course more important than just support is that we agree on them. I hope we will also come to agreement on other things, such as the structure of the photon and matter particles, etc., although most such things were not covered in great detail in this paper. You could look at my papers in previous contests to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 17:31 GMT
Paul,

I prefer the particle physicist view of notional 'centre of mass', which seems to work well in all cases, giving a 'CofM' frame for all the symmetrical motions but not requiring a 3D spherically symmetrical form. The helix purely appears when adding time and path parameters.

A 'matter' particle may then be a multiple version of the photon toroid. You describe it excellently above, where each toroid may move through the others 'hole' and expand as the other reduces to do the same. There are some brilliant video's of Dolphins producing these as bubbles.

The 'charge peak of the photon would rotate with the orbital angular momentum attributed to all particles, as well as the counter charge 'winging around the toroid tubular body. This is the exact model of an active galactic nucleus (AGN). A stellar scale one (between) can be seen at the heart of the Crab nebula. The 'windings produce the jets. (see also Nuclear tokamaks).

My previous essays discuss more specifically. Does that all sound consistent with your thoughts?

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 03:20 GMT
Dear Basudeba,

Thank you for your general agreement.

The answers of how and why the universe started cannot be discerned from the universe itself unless its creator purposely encoded that information in it in some way for us, so that we can observe it and understand it. The only other way it could be discerned would be through direct communication with the creator or with someone...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jun. 12, 2013 @ 08:59 GMT
Hello, dear Paul!

Very interesting essay! That's right, you aktualiziruete category of "structure" at all levels of reality. And I totally agree with you: Man has often chosen paths that have led to great suffering when other paths were available to achieve needed results with great rewards ». Regards, Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 20:47 GMT
Dear Paul

Your interpretation is very meticulous but indecision and uncertainty.

It would more great if you self-expanding it instead of encouraging others.

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 17:23 GMT
Dear Peter,

A basic motion contains three structural information generation/containment structures that generate and contain structural information. The first is its current position information, the second is its motion amplitude information, and the third is its directional information. All of these information structures interact with the external spatial dimensional system structures....

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 20:16 GMT
Paul,

Just reviewing for final scoring and found I'd missed the above.

I agree the 'simplest' motion may be linear but I'm saying the difference between mathematics and nature is the nature is never perfectly linear. In this case all particles do indeed consist of motion but circular motion, becoming a spiral with motion of the whole. This is the ubiquitous 'orbital angular...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 19:47 GMT
Dear Valdimir,

Thank you for your agreement. I read your paper, so I can talk with you more intelligently. You have a good concept that understanding basic forms and that of which they are composed are very important steps to being able to understand them and the larger scale objects or forms of which they are members. I propose that you consider that the output of the dimensional...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 13:20 GMT
Hello Paul,

Thank you for your very detailed and thorough answer. If possible, leave your comment on my forum and give your fair evaluation of my essay and my ideas. Best regards.

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 18:33 GMT
Dear Paul,

I'm glad you come back to the forum! I'm waiting for you on my forum. Your opinion is very valuable to me.

With kind regards and best wishes,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 20:20 GMT
Dear Hoang,

Thank you for your comment. If my goal was to just bring man’s technological abilities up to some desired level or to make a big name and lots of money for myself, you are right that self expanding would be the best and fastest approach to accomplishing that goal. My goal, however, is to give man the basic conceptual tools to develop the technology himself, so that in the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 01:49 GMT
Dear Paul B

Indeed "we cannot access absolute reality to get the answers directly from it", so we only have one way is used of thinking to determine and inference - that is the philosophy, is the science - the answer absolute accuracy is the only answer consistent with all relevant questions.

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jun. 26, 2013 @ 18:58 GMT
Dear Hoang,

You are right, we cannot directly access reality. We can only observe the results of interactions between parts of reality that create effects that we are capable of observing. From our observations we try to extrapolate an understanding of the nature of those parts of reality that create the observed effects. If we come up with a model of how we think the universe works that...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 04:16 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 @ 19:00 GMT
Paul,

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


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 02:47 GMT
Dear James,

I read your paper and you give a good introduction into an area of thought that although it is not truly scientifically based, it is often treated and presented by some in the scientific community as though it is based on scientific principles. Basically the problem is trying to take the understanding of the nature of reality beyond what man can scientifically determine and...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 07:58 GMT
Hello Paul,

Well written essay and great way to deal with the contest's question with the two concepts - internal structural and external relational information! I really like this. After all information is received by particles and revealed by them too - something we seem to mutually say.

In addition your conclusion that, structure and its information are the same thing, sits well with my line of thinking.

Congratulations on some fantastic foundational thinking! Very thought provoking and interesting! Excellent!

Best Wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 18:53 GMT
Dear Antony,

Thank you for your positive comments on my paper. I doubt that many who read my paper will get a true in depth understanding of what is presented because of the limited space available for description. When I talk about internal structural information I am not talking about what we perceive to be particles, but what actually exists that generates our perception of those...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 02:33 GMT
Hi Paul,

Great example relating it to Fibonacci and Black Hole dimensionality. I agree that the sequence is abstract until it is applied to something real and that this describes interaction between dimensionality. So yes math didn't create the universe, but is a language which emerges from it, perhaps able to describe it.

I think you put this very well here - so I understand your very well thought out point.

All the best,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 10:37 GMT
Paul,

Excellent and well executed essay, I must say! I found your understanding of the topic intuitive and reflective in many ways of the findings of a recently concluded 12 year experiment I have conducted. I am please to give you a high rating. However before I do, I would like to run some questions by you if I may via email. My email address is: msm@physicsofdestiny.com

I look forward to hearing from you and supporting your efforts.

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 03:53 GMT
Paul,

Interesting way of explaining that internal structural information is not completely knowable, having to look at it through relational information.

"The answer to this question is neither. Instead it should be: it

is bit and bit is either it or at least derived from it. This is because structure and its information are the same thing."

Since this is what you say about the contest question, I assume you mean that structure and its information are the same thing because you can reverse engineer the house (used as an example) and its information is intrinsic to the structure.

In "It's Good to be the King" I debunk the Anthropic Principle and Wheeler's "It from Bit" concept but must admit I have no alternative model.I would like to see you view of my essay.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stephen James Anastasi wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 09:42 GMT
Hello Paul!

Crikey, you use long paragraphs!

That aside, I enjoyed reading your paper and like the idea of a hierarchical universe. Indeed I wonder whether you might show this hierarchy beginning with the foundational structure of the Harmony Set of my essay and working into higher levels.

If you like my work or see a connection, please comment, and feel free to rate it accordingly (9 or 10 is fine!). You may find it a bit abstract but not too hard mathematically.

Best wishes

Stephen Anastasi

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 03:50 GMT
Dear Antony,

Sorry it took so long for me to respond. Many things came up that I had to attend to that kept me from getting back to check on my page here.

I could not say that the Fibonacci sequence actually describes the interaction between dimensionality within a black hole because as of yet man has not been able to make observations that would support the concept that...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Antony Ryan replied on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 01:49 GMT
Dear Paul,

Many thanks for these very well thought out points. I'll take them on board to consider deeper. Of course you are right that we can't explore Black Holes.

Thanks again and all the best,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 23:43 GMT
Dear James,

Thank you for the comment that an aspect of my paper is interesting.

You are close, but not quite there. The information stored in the structure of the house exists because it is the structure. This would be the case whether anyone was present to reverse engineer the house or not. Any existent entity not only contains all of the information about it, that information...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 01:27 GMT
Dear Stephen,

I am glad you enjoyed my paper. I am also glad that you like the idea of a hierarchical universe, since all observational information indicates that our universe is structured that way. The broad categories of the hierarchy would be as follows. The bottom level of the hierarchy, at least as far as I can go into at this time, would be the empty dimensional system. The second...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 11:37 GMT
Dear Paul,

A very well written piece, uninterrupted by mathematical equations. Your perspective from a literary position is well argued. You may want to add to this a view of the topic from the philosophical perspective, also not obscured by equations! Then if you are inclined, you may read the judgement in the case of Atomistic Enterprises Inc. vs. Plato & Ors delivered on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 11:39 GMT after taking some of the views of FQXi community members into consideration.

Best regards,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 19:21 GMT
Thanks, Paul, for taking an interest. We all like to have our ideas consdered.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 08:10 GMT
Dear Paul,

I am really enjoyed reading your essay. I find there many confirmations to own viewpoints and I just very inclined to rate your work as one valuable for me in this contest. The main thing for my that you have clearly formulated that is indivisibility real object and real information. And the abstract information is only human's creation and it can have value for our brain only. Please you spent small time and open my work ES text which have some different direction. I hope it will interesting for you and you will see some communication between our thinking base.

I hope get some your comments in my forum then we will complete our opinions.

with good wishes,

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 00:02 GMT
Dear Akinbo,

Thank you for your positive comments about my paper. I have tried to look at things from the philosophical perspective and also from the abstract math model perspective, but I have found both to be lacking in some way at least for my uses. The philosophical approach tends to lack depth when analyzing reality, which is extremely deep and complex in structure. The arguments...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 18:23 GMT
Dear Akinbo,

I sent this comment yesterday and it appeared on my page, but when I looked today it was no longer there. I am sending it again today in case there was some software problem that caused it to be deleted, etc.

TO FQXI: If it was deleted purposely for some reason, please let me know why in an email to me or in a comment on this page, so I can understand the reason and...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 19:24 GMT
Dear Paul

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


Antony Ryan wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 14:13 GMT
Hello Paul,

Thanks for the reply above. I've rated your essay now highly as I think it deserves to be further up the rankings. Hope thus helps.

Best wishes and look forward to further discussions in the future!

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 21:50 GMT
Dear Paul,

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


George Kirakosyan wrote on Aug. 10, 2013 @ 05:23 GMT
Dear Paul,

Many thanks for your detailed comments to my work and for your valuable observations as well.

As I say from beginning (in my post above), we have many common in our approaches if look deeply.

Meantime the ways and formulations as well as the stated questions have some differences as you mentioned. In my view it is normal and natural – two brains cannot work the same and to copy each other. Main thing for me that is these are working on the same principle and direction that we can see as some indication that its work is right! If I will start to analyze and compare our works now, it will mean the narration most of what I already have presented in my works. On this let me just to refer on my works mentioned in my essay (see in references.) I am friendly suggesting you try to read these in your enough free time. Hope you will find some answers and these will be somewhat useful. Thus, I can offer to you what I have and I trust of what. We can exchange our impressions after.

All the best,

George

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.