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

William Carine: on 10/24/13 at 15:46pm UTC, wrote Dear Crowell, Sorry for my first quick reply! I had a misconception here,...

William Carine: on 8/7/13 at 22:39pm UTC, wrote Hi Paul, I am also in awe that so many different views were all centered...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 22:14pm UTC, wrote Dear William, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the...

William Carine: on 8/7/13 at 14:23pm UTC, wrote Thanks for all of the participation in the comment section here! I will...

George Kirakosyan: on 8/6/13 at 6:45am UTC, wrote Many thanks Dear Amos, I am glad that we can share many of our viewpoints....

William Carine: on 8/6/13 at 6:01am UTC, wrote Dear Kirakosyan,

George Kirakosyan: on 8/6/13 at 4:50am UTC, wrote William, I have open and read your essay just accidentally - if speaking...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: ""The motion of the solar system, and the orientation of the plane of the..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Jim Snowdon: "On the permanently dark side of the Earth, the stars would appear to stay..." in The Nature of Time

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Jorma, some thoughts; You mention mutual EM connection. I think you..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

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

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

akash hasan: "Some students have an interest in researching and space exploration. I..." in Announcing Physics of the...

Michael Jordan: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Anonymous: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Constructing a Theory of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi FORUM
May 26, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: Breaking the Code of Infromation by William Amos Carine [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author William Amos Carine wrote on May. 31, 2013 @ 13:10 GMT
Essay Abstract

Information has been known for a comparatively long time as a concept in science. However, it has yet to enter mainstream theoretical physics as an entity which can be computed, and which can lead to meaningful experiments. The purpose of this essay is to discuss how to deal with the physics of info in the Information Age. It also engages the questions of how to define information, and what its true nature is. It is hoped that the essay will bring the concept of data closer to those thinkers familiar with it philosophically but not mathematically, or in a new way to those with expertise in their field. If nothing else, may it excite in the reader a happy and speculative laugh or two!

Author Bio

I am currently a undergraduate physics student. I play music or do art regularly on the side. I hope to finish a degree in Sweden, if I am lucky enough to complete what is necessary for this plan.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Robert Bennett wrote on May. 31, 2013 @ 18:46 GMT
William,

You stated that

"the idea of an aether was proposed, but experiments found the lack of evidence for one again and again."

Other than vacuum interferometer tests, what experiments found a lack of evidence for aether??

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on May. 31, 2013 @ 22:33 GMT
The tests or experiment that you are referring to is the Michelson-Morley Experiment, with was done at the turn of the 19th century. This was meant to sort out the Maxwellian notion of constant speed of em waves, that was opposed to the idea of directional aether drift. So the idea was that by having a crisscross set up like a letter x, light would slow down in some direction and go faster in a another, and that could be measured. So this was the buzz at that time when results (from any experimenters) were null.

But today, the concept of a carrier of light and motion is best expressed in General Relativity, where space time fabric, takes the physiological place of the old Newtonian aether. So, following this line of thought, experiments Today must try to detect the presence of space time behavior. Such experiments would be testing for a non-negative vacuum expectation value. To date, I know of no with meaning full results, so you have me there! I just wanted to express the pyschological from old to modern, and then suggest that today, if there have been any tests, the results have no evidence for this aether idea. Can you think of any such experiments currently going on in science, or a way to detect a vacuum expectation value?

I hope I cleared up what I meant in that sentence, and I could have been more clear. It's more of a suggestion if the reader happened to pick up on the possibilities of other tests for aether. Which you did! Thank you for bringing up the good point.

Bookmark and Share


Author William Amos Carine replied on May. 31, 2013 @ 22:34 GMT
Pyschological role* sorry.

Bookmark and Share


Akinbo Ojo replied on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 12:49 GMT
Hello William,

Just a comment on above comment. I will advise you get your degree first before saying anything contrary to what your lecturer believes so as not to put your career in jeopardy.

1. The M-M expt used the earth surface as a turntable to discover earlier or later arrival of light signals. It found no difference (so called isotropy of light speed). The rotating turntable here is both for orbital motion and earth rotation.

2. Another experimenter, Sagnac used another turntable, this time earth-bound and found anisotropy, i.e. differences in light arrival corresponding exactly to the rotation speed.

3. Turntable experiments, this time with the light source located far above earth surface in the Global Positioning System find anisotropy due to earth rotation (a finding absent in the M-M expt).

As I said earn your degree first, then join us in the battle to restore our physics where it should be.

Cheers,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Reed wrote on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 05:50 GMT
William

“For example, when two particles collide and shoot off in different directions, measuring one necessarily changes the state of the other, by information alone.”

How does this occur then? Assuming that what you say did occur, for the sake of the argument, how does measuring (observing/whatever) alter the physical circumstance, which has already occurred?

Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author William Amos Carine wrote on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 06:55 GMT
Hello Paul!

This is a great question, thank you for asking! The major interpretation of the incompleteness of the quantum state or theory is posed in the well known Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paper of the 1930's. In its more generally talked about form, the main or basic argument in that paper is know as the EPR parodox. Basically what the paper said was that if you have a quantum state with...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


basudeba mishra replied on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 15:50 GMT
Dear Sir,

There is much confusion in science today due to one-up-man-ship. EPR is the outcome of an ego clash between two scientists.

Schrödinger coined the term “entanglement” to describe the connection between quantum systems. The entangled state is not an independent state, but a state dependent on another state in some way. For example, if a laser is shone at a crystal, it...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 18:49 GMT
Dear Sir Basudeba,

Ego fights should be avoided at all costs, especially when things need to be evaluated at face value, so good call their. I think they are more acceptable in letters, but what happens between two physicists outside of acedemics often makes a muck wash of events that need tranquil minds to look at them, a piece at a time. Schrödinger said that two states became dependent...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


basudeba mishra replied on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 23:02 GMT
Dear William,

One fallacy that is continuing for about a century is the notion that a light pulse has to bounce back from an object for its measurement and this disturbs the object. Measurement is a process of comparison between similars. You measure length by comparing it with the length of a scale. You measure area or volume or density by comparing it with the area or volume or density of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 15:46 GMT
Dear William,

For my fragile heart’s sake, could you please explain a bit better what you meant when you wrote: “… Einstein’s workings, occurring with the use of a certain type of information (Fisher information, …”)

The problem with Newton and Einstein and every theoretical and practical physicist who has ever lived is that they have never noticed that every real thing in the real Universe is unique, once. Postulated numbers are not unique. Although postulated numbers are mindlessly tossed onto all manner of things real and imagined such as temperature gauges, timepieces and abstract human intelligence quotients, this only increases the ignorance and useless parasite capabilities of pathetic mankind.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jun. 1, 2013 @ 19:26 GMT
Dear Joe Fisher,

I will try to clear up what I meant by my writing, especially if it is a heart matter! I indicated that the scientific developments to date might have been processes where the minds of Newton's or Einstein's, or and working physicist, we're actually processing information by itself, and the parts of this info which corresponded to the needs of their times was drawn out of the heap of data and put into their physics. So I meant there is the (very real) possibility that scientific schemes to date are just simpler versions of this mess of information out there. It is kinda like the idea that since Relativity approximates Newtonian laws when things are slowed down enough as to avoid relativistic effects, that Newton drew from the foundations of Relativity Theory. Wait you say, this is backwards! It is in our common notions of experience where one thing leads to the next. But I merely wanted to indicate that that is what physics today that use information to come up with laws do. The only necessity that I see is that afterwards these laws line up with the facts, that is are realistic.

Your uniqueness view reminds me of the beauty of single snowflakes on a calm winters day. This snow flake uniquity is very interesting, but very few people have been let in on the exceptional minds of people like Einstein, so it is tough to say what he knew he was overlooking.One who feeds on the ideas held in a culture without adding back food for thought is no better than a parasite. Yet, on the other hand, the people who think of such fundamental changes often have no idea what will trickle down from it, so that only the pursuit of the idea for its own sake is of value. Google "langarian and fisher information" if you want to know more about the topic first discussed dealing with information use in coming up with scientific law.

Earnestly,

W. Amos Carine.

Bookmark and Share



Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Jun. 3, 2013 @ 04:05 GMT
You made on statement that I thought was curious. You said that information is defined according to physical means instead of probabilities. Of course with the Khinchin-Shannon theorem information is defined for the n^th probability as I_n = log(P_n) and entropy is

S = -sum_n P_n I_n = -sum_n P_n log(P_n).

For P_n = 1/N and the sum over n sums up to N it is not hard to show that entropy is log(N). This then connects with the Boltzmann result that S = k log(Ω), for the volume in phase space the macrostate of the system occupies.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Oct. 24, 2013 @ 15:46 GMT
Dear Crowell,

Sorry for my first quick reply! I had a misconception here, as is common when thinking about anything.

Best regards,

Amos Carine.

Bookmark and Share



Author William Amos Carine wrote on Jun. 3, 2013 @ 17:11 GMT
Hello LC,

Without delving into math where I'd be off the grid, but I think the tricky part of this connection of information Shannon deals with in his entropy and that very well expounded on Boltzmann's result is that information has new implications for the view of density in phase space. The differences that show up in the connection you made view-able here from info to thermodynamics suggest that the little bit of "change" that may result from this comparison is interpreted as a physic effect in the Boltzmann sense. As unrelated this may seem, I don't see entropy getting clearer until the electron's motion is better understood, if one can envision the density of electrodynamics dealing with charged points being similar to a particle showing a certain volume in statistical mechanics.

Best,

W. Amos Carine.

Bookmark and Share



Anonymous wrote on Jun. 9, 2013 @ 21:43 GMT
Amos,

A very important point you bring up is that of "space being made out of the same thing as the matter in it." I noted that Einstein said, "there is no space absent of field."

I'm curious about other points in your essay. For example you say "there would have to be evidence to disprove [it from bit]" I would think that one would ask for evidence to prove it. The artwork is a...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author William Amos Carine wrote on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 17:58 GMT
Hello Klingman,

The basis of what I am saying there is that the information view is right until it is very evidently and clearly wrong, and may be pursued without harm up to that point where it may be a dead end. It's kind of like this. If you have a theory, say on heavily using information, and some experiment or observation shows support of not it but another theory which does justice to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 18:19 GMT
Hello, William!

I enjoyed reading your essay! Very pleased with your non-trivial view of the researcher. It makes delve further into the concepts of "information". "matter". "space", "time", to reach the most remote of meanings, a new look at the philosophical foundations of physics and mathematics and information theory. Good luck in the contest, Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author William Amos Carine wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 20:08 GMT
Vladimir R.,

Your comment is too kind, yet thank you for the wish of luck and looking into it philosophically. I look forward to reading your essay, and am sure it will be enjoyable!

Best,

W.A.C.

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 20:23 GMT
Dear William

You have a very practical desire, perhaps the only thing missing is a solution.

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 21:30 GMT
Hai,

Thank you for linking your essay to mine in favor of the common interest of a reader.

Best,

W. Amos Carine

Bookmark and Share



Antony Ryan wrote on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 00:45 GMT
Hello William,

Nice to read your essay - I wonder if the code to which you refer could be linked to the Fibonacci sequence, which has been my approach?

Beautiful drawing included and well utilised example that information leads to a bigger reality.

Interesting take - best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 15:44 GMT
Hello Ryan,

The code I was vaguely identifying was the idea that all physics comes from information and that if we figure out how and what that information transfers, then we would better understand pur laws, and perhaps come up with a few more. So if this ties into the sequence mentioned, I do not have the mathematical skills or haunch to boast about it, though it may be likely that there is some link.

And it is a great piece of artwork, so expressive in its plain use of color and shading. The artist girl has talent. I'm sure you could send her a fb request and say you saw a drawing in my essay, to see more of her work.

Hoping you take care,

W. Amos Carine.

Bookmark and Share


Antony Ryan replied on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 02:26 GMT
Hello William,

I may very well do that, as I'm keen on art. The mathematics isn't too tough for Fiboancci - each number is the sum of the previous two, so 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 etc, etc. This also extends to the negatives. -3, 2, -1, 1, 0.

A theory away from the contest I've developed stores information geometrically, so I applied it to singularities for this contest to explore what happens to information "if" it falls into a Black Hole to determine It from Bit or Bit from It.

All the best,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 19:42 GMT
Antony,

That sounds like a very interesting bit of argumentation. I'll have to read your essay and look for references for the outside-the-contest papers.

Is a singularity different than a boundary? Boundaries seem unnatural to any view of the world which try's to encapsulate the whole of nature in one picture like physics does. This is the boundary of a line or point. One of the beauties of relativity in its general form is that the boundary or line between our universe and empty space, envisaged in old Newtonian schemes, is the disappearance of the end of the universe boundary line. Instead, light bends around the edges of the universe, it never "goes on forever" or to infinity (and beyond!). So the natural question arises, are blackholes an "edge" or are they mapped out by physical, geometrical means. Also, is the inside of a black hole uniform, or is that a silly question because, by contraction of figures to their plane form by S.R., the edges really get compacted to a stop in this scenerio. Either way, I think the finite yet unbound view concerning light paths and the presence of black bodies solved for by G.R. give physicists two clues.

Best,

W. Amos Carine

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 04:23 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

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 17:11 GMT
Dear Hai,

Thank you for your emphatic argumentation. You set up a mighty defense. I find it tough to wage charges on relativity in physical theory when its road has not been taken to its rightful end. It's an argument against a group of theories which acknowledge their incompleteness. It is good enough to be aware of these problems and try to resolve them. Also, stressing strict determinism has negative effects for a realistic approach. It seems like an inner mental vein which feeds on itself and takes up human resources for contemplation of other problems, and hence the "whole picture."

Hope the research works out for you, but I have no applicability of ideas in this submission for the essay contest.

Best,

W. Amos Carine.

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:59 GMT
William,

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 William Amos Carine replied on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 20:12 GMT
Hello Jim,

That would be quite the feat! I have read through some that interest me by title or subject, and always try to return the favor of those who have read and commented here. My thinking is that if others have interest, it in their work will likely be reciprocated by me. The essay batch content seems to be quite relevant to what is going on in physics outside of the contest as well. The essays I see on this contest have topics that come up in more journal-like papers, and those papers often hint at ideas discussed in these essays. So to this end, I will give it a look.

Best of luck with the reading,

W. Amos Carine.

Bookmark and Share



Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 14:22 GMT
William,

I found your essay very insightful and well expressed! I like your analogy of using the drawing by artist Taylor Marie to bring across your point, excellent example.

I would like to ask you some questions if I may via email. My email address is msm@physicsofdestiny.com or please inform me of your email address in your response to my comments.

Thanks,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 14:56 GMT
Hello Manuel,

I'm delighted that you enjoyed the example with the addition of the excellent art by Marie Taylor! Your interest in this contest is appreciated, both here and elsewhere, I'm sure! Any email will get to me at carine.5@wright.edu

Best,

Amos Carine.

I'll be sure to try to answer any questions there.

Bookmark and Share



M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 22:11 GMT
Hey Amos,

thank you for your encouraging comments on my essay, even though it was hard for me to follow your thought. I agree with you that "before one goes to the math of an item to be described, one should understand it conceptually". You did a nice job in your essay, which got better and better toward the end.

I very much liked your idea of a close tie of time with information...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

M. V. Vasilyeva replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 22:43 GMT
Amos,

I just noticed that again I forgot to mention the obvious lol and that is that a recursive loop lies at the heart of a fractal. But if you know fractals you should know this.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 16:26 GMT
Marina,

I'm glad you enjoyed my comments. I will read the essays you said were interesting, and am sure I'll find them to be myself as well! It is hard to find more important or relevant ones out of the many terrific essays submitted, so a tip off or lead in the right direction is useful. You must have read a lot of papers and other materials before submitting. I didn't do all of my...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


M. V. Vasilyeva replied on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 02:33 GMT
Hi Amos!

The other good essay you may want to read is by Joseph Brenner. He did a very good job at answering the main question of the contest. Very thoughtful and thorough, very interesting quotes on what is info (even though he takes a rather cautious position on space).

The other essay I liked very much was by Prof. McHarris -- fascinating, about chaos and non-linear logic.

I also liked essay by Conrad Dale Johnson. Good read. He takes Wheeler seriously and explores information in evolutionary terms. Goes well with Prof. McHarris, who mentions computer programs made to mimic evolution.

And then you gotta read the 'big shots': Sean Gryb, Olaf Dreyer, Carlo Rovelli, Ken Wharton, etc.

If you find something exceptionally interesting, let me know too :)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 18:02 GMT
William,

Nicely written essay, non controversial as needed from an undergrad, and well presented.

But a few points; Neils Bohr almost failed young Heisenberg's thesis as he 'missed' the lense interaction. In saying; "...Time, by observation, is the movement of the hands on a clock to another location on its face. Each of these cases involves the use of analyzing differences which can...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author William Amos Carine wrote on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 21:46 GMT
Peter,

Thanks for the feedback, and reading your comments was a joyous experience. You are entirely correct in that much of the important parts in understanding light and time are left out. I just meant that there is not outside meaning to a value of "time" in itself as a quantity, and analysis of the parts I left out bare more significance for getting it. I could have been more clear, though I only meant that Time has no meaning as itself (the particulars mentioned by you do) besides that of a facsimile reading, at which place two similar clocks run the same. When one realizes Einstein's words are fairly new (about 60 years old), it's exciting because scientists and the general community can still learn from the man. Thanks for sharing Einsteins wisdom, something I wish wasn't abused out of context as frequently as it is.

With appreciative regards especially for the quotes,

Amos.

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 14:04 GMT
William,

I'm very pleased that my words pleased you, and thanks for your comment on mine. I hope you don't forget my points too!

Thanks and Best wishes.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 08:17 GMT
Hello William,

We corresponded before June 1. Have you found time to read my essay? 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

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 15:59 GMT
Hello Akinbo,

I remembered you commented, but I reread your words to make sure I was thinking of the right correspondence. Your essay was one of the first I read after I submitted mine to be a part of this large group of exception essays. Unfortunately, it was at a time when I lived a bit away from one of my college's computer labs (the physics one, as it were!) where I could get free printing. I had written down my comments on a paper version, only to lose them before I could transcribe. I'll look at the essay for a second time momentarily. It has been quite the opportunity for quality interaction that is for the most part above me. Regardless, I'm sure the case mentioned above will look different as a result. I'm pleased that you presented another chance to read a submission and recapitulate past thoughts, and also look at something in a new way as compared to a noggin that is similar but not exactly how it was a few months ago.

Pleased with the combo of old and new,

Amos.

Bookmark and Share



eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 20:04 GMT
Dear William,

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

Author William Amos Carine replied on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 23:04 GMT
Hello Amazigh,

The essay rating period is coming to a close, and it was more enjoyable participating in the event and reading quality work. I'm looking forward to next year already. I hope that people will still read the group of essays for this year and ask questions they have even when the "contest" is over. Your view is subtly different than others because it says info has energy itself, or that energy is the origin of data. I read your essay and commented, but did not rate it because I don't have my voter code with me. I will later.

I think the most important thoughts I've come across during the start and approaching close of this event, and not necessarily all from this site, is that info corresponds with expansion and movement. The more you know about something, the more spread out it is. Dr. Susskind talked about this. There are still deep mysteries out there about the nature of information, but this essay posting and the following colloquium I feel has helped out numerous people who participated.

Cheers,

Amos.

Bookmark and Share


eAmazigh M. HANNOU replied on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 12:07 GMT
Dear William Amos Carine,

Yes, (e) is a mystery.

(e) for eEnergy, for a new science in coming : a binary Science, dual Science, fundamental Science.

I have discovered the functionning of eUniverse : eDuality is in all things, like motion.

And all things arising, by couple, pair.

« simple, complex », « wave, particle », « space, time », « matter, antimatter », « electicity, magnetism », « Weak force , Strong force », « gravity, expansion of space », and so on...

Duality is in all cultures (Egyptians, Greecs, Indians, Chineses, ...) and in each one of us, but never explained and equaled like in China.

The « Yin, Yang » duality is full of truth, but this must be completed and reinterpreted, like our Science.

eDuality is present in physics, mathematics, philosophy, economics, biology, chemistry, religion, our thinking, in computers and mechanical machinery, linguistics, and so on...

Each one of us speaks with eDuality.

eDuality is the same everywhere.

There is one kind of eDuality when this concept is clear known.

eUniverse is very simple at the begining, very complex after.

This eDuality, these opposites, these contraries, are the 0 and 1 of information.

It takes a book to explain all these concepts : eEnergy, eInfo, eReality, eDuality, and so on...

Good luck,

Amazigh H.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

eAmazigh M. HANNOU replied on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 12:55 GMT
P.s. I'll be happy if you see the duality that is in the music, your favourite hobby of art, and you indicate me that, to include this information as reference, in my next book.

Best wishes,

Amazigh H.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 04:50 GMT
William,

I have open and read your essay just accidentally - if speaking honestly! And I come too surprised by such question: how this inquisitive man can understand and formulate clearly the essence of matter when it remains still dark for many of ,,leading,, theorists! Yes, my dear! The ,,information,, and ,,bits,, as well as our language, mathematics, symbols and formulas etc are our creations only! Thanks of these we can made the picture of reality and describe/investigate its essence and property, and nothing more! I think this simple think must comprehend any healthy brain.

So, I welcome your work (that is very close to my spirit!) and have rated it on high score with pleasure! Hope my work will deserved to your attention.

Best wishes to you!

George Kirakosyan.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author William Amos Carine replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 06:01 GMT
Dear Kirakosyan,

attachments: 1_Diogenes_looking_for_a_man_-_attributed_to_JHW_Tischbein.jpg

Bookmark and Share


George Kirakosyan replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 06:45 GMT
Many thanks Dear Amos,

I am glad that we can share many of our viewpoints.

Best wishes!

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author William Amos Carine wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 14:23 GMT
Thanks for all of the participation in the comment section here! I will answer any questions or respond to comments after this contest is over as well.

Bookmark and Share



Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 22:14 GMT
Dear William,

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

Author William Amos Carine replied on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 22:39 GMT
Hi Paul,

I am also in awe that so many different views were all centered around information and that they were well written too. I have no idea how many I've read, but your reading is very industrious.

Thanks for the notice of your essay.

Good Luck,

Amos.

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.