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

Hoang Hai: on 9/14/17 at 11:59am UTC, wrote With my Absolute Theory 2011 - I have told more about this in : My unusual...

Hoang Hai: on 10/16/13 at 2:03am UTC, wrote Sincere thanks to all of you, whether it is praise or criticism. ...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 19:27pm UTC, wrote Dear Hải.Caohoàng, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for...

Hoang Hai: on 8/7/13 at 17:56pm UTC, wrote Dear to all - A SIMPLE CHALLENGE On the occasion of the end of "community...

Hoang Hai: on 8/6/13 at 19:41pm UTC, wrote Thankyou Margriet , It was happy when get your empathy.

Hoang Hai: on 8/6/13 at 19:31pm UTC, wrote Thank you very much, I also read and rate your essay.

Margriet O'Regan: on 8/6/13 at 12:31pm UTC, wrote Hi Hoang - from Margriet O'Regan You queried about my qualifying...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/4/13 at 18:57pm UTC, wrote Dear Hoang, We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "What is happening in material reality provides the connection to inertia...." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

Georgina Woodward: ""We saw early on that as conformed by countless experiment, there is no..." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

Ian Durham: ""Loony" Max Tegmark is the director of the organization that runs this..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Lorraine Ford: "Ian, I’m sorry for going overboard on the “physicists think that”..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

andrea gonzalez: "Interesting stuff to read. Keep it up. If want to collect free gift card..." in Memory, Causality and...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in First Things First: The...

Poker Online: "https://www.jakartapoker.net/" in Downward causation:...

Enquire us: "Your Ro system desires regular maintenance to confirm it’s continually in..." in Agency in the Physical...


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
August 25, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: With each question, the absolute will only have a single correct answer! by hoang cao hai [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 16:45 GMT
Essay Abstract

This topic is one of the questions belonging kind "forever" but still do not have any answers will be accepted. It seems that the issue is purely about "perception" rather than by the level of knowledge or ability of our intelligence. With hoping to bring a "other view" for people to experience and apply to the settlement of the issues that concern us, I will give one answer considered as temporary is the solution most correct, or more specifically : is the only measures to address this issues in a way entirely absolute. One thing is certain is : even if my answer is not absolutely correct, if you or someone can prove to be a result of "more absolute" the final results will be : With each question - will absolute only one the single correct answer. You let is to try that are : all of which are absolute in space and over time. You can will get a wonderful faith - just like me.

Author Bio

Full name : Hoàngcao Hải Gender : Male Date of birth : 1971 Place of birth and current residence : Hanoi - Vietnam Education Level :Independent Researchers Professional qualifications : Technical Measurement Current work : Self - study theory new foundation for science The ability of schools : Analysis, Reasoning, Imagining The results work : the ABSOLUTE theory (2011)

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 16:36 GMT
Hoàngcao Hải Gender

This is one of the most charming essays I have ever read. It is a bit difficult to read at first because although the English language sentence tenses are written correctly, the peculiar sequencing of the tensed words skews – but does not eliminate – the intended meaning.

May I offer you my absolutes?

The real Universe only deals in absolutes. All information is abstract and all and every abstract part of information is excruciatingly difficult to understand. Information is always selective, subjective and sequential. Reality is not and cannot ever be selective subjective and sequential.

One (1) real Universe can only be eternally occurring in one real here and now while perpetually traveling at one real “speed” of light through one real infinite dimension once. One is the absolute of everything. (1) is the absolute of number. Real is the absolute of being. Universe is the absolute of energy. Eternal is the absolute of duration. Occurring is the absolute of action. Here and now are absolutes of location and time. Perpetual is the absolute of ever. Traveling is the absolute of conveyance method. Light is the absolute of speed. Infinite dimension is the absolute of distance and once is the absolute of history.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:52 GMT
Thank you very much.

Bookmark and Share


Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 22:58 GMT
Dear all

For clarity in the comments with you, I will calculate your essay score by 5 criteria,with 2 points each :

1. The idea actually

2. Similar views

3. Measures consistent

4. Conclusions detail

5. Applying diversity

Or we can to use style as " the black market exchange"

Hope to get the support of everyone.

For other discussions, please contact via email : hoangcao_hai@yahoo.com

Bookmark and Share


Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Sep. 14, 2017 @ 11:59 GMT
With my Absolute Theory 2011 - I have told more about this in : My unusual special story : Discover the Truth.

https://www.amazon.com/Discover-Truth-especially-Extra
ordinary-Autobiography-ebook/dp/B0754JJPVT/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF
8&qid=1504091772&sr=8-1&keywords=discover+the+truth+of+h%E1%
BA%A3i.caoho%C3%A0ng

Bookmark and Share



Domenico Oricchio wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 10:29 GMT
I reread your article, thank for your score (I am not interested to the rate, but with content of the essays).

There are some interesting reasoning, in your article.

The idea that each differential equation have a probabilistic flow, and your idea of store-absorb transmitt-process are similar; I don't like study in deep my theories, because in the same time I can make others, so they are ever theorically weak, because I am interested to the foundations and generally I get bored.

The other interesting reasoning is the happy and sad state in the brain: I think that serotonin (low velocity) signal in the brain is a similar to the neurotransmitter (high velocity) signal, so that our mood, and our thought are processed in parallel: one is dna based (ancestral memory), the other is brain based (short and long term memory), so that (I think) that we are ever bipolar, in perennial conflict between the genetic memory and the brain memory.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:54 GMT
Wish you success.

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 10:47 GMT
Dear Hoàngcao,

Good to see you here again, and I am pleased to say I'm in full agreement with all the important points in your essay, as I think you will find from mine, which is a campaign for absolute reality.

I particularly agree with; "The absorption and transmission the impact of material", and the need to establish; "What is information? What is its relation to "Reality"? I run a complete "real" scenario to show the power of reality over "metaphysics" and unreal beliefs. Which is beacause, as you say;

"Final conclusions will depend on the testing..." (so we must); "...make choices: agree, reject or provide more accurate results."

I also had to smile at your conclusion; "do not accept the type of interpretation "although results vary but everyone looks right" - it is not enough and of course is not completely authentic, is not absolute."

You will see I expose an important proof that you are correct, in the REAL data 'hidden' in the Aspect experimental findings, discarded as it did not fit the theoretical prediction.

You may certainly expect a good score from me. It is also nice to see your English has improved so understanding was far easier than last year.

Well done. Congratulations, Best of luck. And I hope you enjoy my essay too.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:57 GMT
Hope would frequently get the sincere comments of Uncle.

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 02:39 GMT
Dear Hoàngcao

I enjoyed reading your essay. It has a different flavor from many others here. Science has become dry and abstract - I think you are infusing a necessary human point of view through your questions and speculations.

This belongs to the category of 'philosophy of science' - a new field for me!

Through your words I feel you regard physics as a quasi-religious search for truth. The human observer has a right to question 'meaning'. From that perspective like you I have come to realize that my own model of reality is based on a kind of 'faith' of what Nature may be. As I describe in my essay we can never know for sure, only speculate..search. Some people can call that contemplate - not far from prayer!

There is a Portuguese word that I think means 'happy-sad' : saudade

As Peter observed your English has improved a lot since last year. I congratulate you and wish you all the best in your studies.

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 05:01 GMT
I am really feel are lucky when receive be those such comments.

Bookmark and Share



basudeba mishra wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 15:58 GMT
Dear Sir,

Your essay is very thought provoking. But since English is not our first language, there may be some communication gap. Please bear with us.

When you talk about absolute, you must clarify the context. Generally absolute means a value or principle regarded as universally valid or regarded as independent of and unrelated to anything else. In philosophy, absolute means...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 20:26 GMT
Dear basudeba and those who are interested

Thank you for taking the time to these comments with very specific question like that.

It is true that the issue of language differences, in this case it seems that there are both differences in scientific opinion anymore.

The concept of "absolute" in my grammar is defined as: Only the one object, a phenomenon or a specific problem - and not any object or any similar phenomenon.

In my theory, the term "absolute" mainly to show to "the true nature of a thing or the real principle of a phenomenon" of something that.

This provision is applicable in all cases, situations or contexts, regardless of Philosophy, Physics or Chemistry ....

My level of English is very limited, so please add:

1. Absorption means: an event or phenomenon in the reception , adding - something - from other objects.

2. Transmission means: an event or phenomenon about the transmission and spread of effect - a passive way.

3. Information is understood as a process that involves receiving an impact from other objects and create an impact on other objects - are related.

In the definition of the three things I mentioned above is same one thing - it's like: you are (1) a person (2) have named (3) So.

Add to that: in my research: most of the concepts in theoretical physics today is not detailed and lack of specific - so I've set up a system of conventions and definitions (very specific and clear detailed) - so I do not use the theory of quarks and leptons as well as the nature of the atomic bonding .... and do not use the words with nature is abstract or the concept .

Even for me "Particle physics underlying current" is too vague, the impasse and in category of "powerlessness." I'm intending to add to a theory that particles "feel" and the "feeling" field to try to get the Nobel Prize to assist sad.

"Validity of a physical statement is judged from its correspondence to reality" - that's what I always follow.

The phrase "entirely accurate" or "absolute accuracy" is the same meaning - to show to the nature or real principles of issue that we're talking about - so: does not mean relativism.

My theory have excess capacity to identify problems for everything, and of course: all of which are absolute in space and time - that is, nothing is Relative - just because we did not understand or misunderstand only.

The nature of the link between a boy and a girl who is also the link nature of atomic - as the absolute theory of mine - identifying and questioning the context as well as identifying my answer, of course is not the same as what is being taught and spread today.

Win or lose and be happy or sad is personal concept - it is only valid for private individual - can not be applied to all - but also because "no one like none" so that it is the "uniqueness" of each one so it is absolute.

"Since the contradictory states relate to the same action" Is single principle? if "yes", it will is Absolutely!

I am absolute, you are absolute and God, too - if other , only because measures we define how for our Lord.

Look forward to more comments from you again.

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share


Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 20:46 GMT
ABOVE IS ANSWER FOR THE ABSOLUTE ASSERTION

Bookmark and Share


basudeba mishra replied on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 02:24 GMT
Dear Sir,

Your post is a pleasure to read for three reasons.

1. There is no basic difference between our views. We are talking about the same thing differently.

2. Your manner of presentation is lovely. There is a saying: presentation makes everything interesting - otherwise nothing is new.

3. Your confidence in yourself is laudable. It is the first sign of success.

God bless you,

Regards,

basudeba

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 15:16 GMT
Dear Uncle Hoang

Thank you for a good thought.

What you call GOD is the sma as my Total Simultaneity, or the primal Sequence, our non-causal part of consciousness in TS is the "GOD" part of ourselves, So we are GOD ourselves and create every moment our "reality" what I called CREALITY. The only absolute is our consciousness....so.... GOD.

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 07:47 GMT
Hello, Caohoàng!

Thank you for your comment on my essay! I enjoyed reading your essay. Very true and timely actualisation of concepts "Absolute", "absolute" (unconditional), "matter", "form", "measure" for science, especially for basic sign systems - Physics and Mathematics. Given the accumulated knowledge they need to be more profound interpretation - all concepts of physics, mathematics, philosophy, and their total integration (synthesis) to build a firm foundation of knowledge building and "grab" the nature of the information. You are quite right in your conclusions: «We was to admit to the dark Matter and Antimatter while we can not identify to them, probably not because we lack ability but because we have not identified the true nature-the absolute nature - for origin of their , that is material. It is also a serious problem in all other fields of physics in particular and science in general .... This problem can be cause of trend to find answers for all problems in life at the Paranormal sacred place - as a permanent always hunch in the human mind will appearance when we desperately (that hunch was a form of compressed information was stored from the time of our ancestors) - God will help! »/

Science is necessary as the "General Theory of Relativity" and "The general theory of absoluteness." By the way, this theory is being developed, in particular, see the article by Dr. of Technical Sciences, Professor V.Etkin. In it, he justifies the "expediency of replacing the principles of invisibility movement of the underlying Special Relativity and General Relativity, on the opposite principle of distinctiveness processes leading to the theory of absoluteness."

http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/texsts/rus/stat/st3994.pdf

Profes
sor V.Etkin in custody quoted academician Tamm (1956): "No one can, of course, to predict what will be the further development of physics, but one thing I think you can say with certainty - Einstein's ideas, his analysis of the concepts of space and time the relationship of space-time relations with the being in space and time, matter may undergo a profound change in the future. "

That time has come, a fact confirmed by Lee Smolin's book " The Trouble with Physics…»

I sincerely wish you success, Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 20:00 GMT
Many thankyou Vladimir

I happy when you was highly appreciated for my essay , I will review the reference of information you have provided and further discussion on this topic with you via email - like that's more convenient.

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share



Michel Planat wrote on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 13:11 GMT
Dear Caohoàng,

I had some problems to follow your idea may be due to the poor English. Do you mean that a physical process such as Planck's absoption/radiation process would merit to be analyzed in terms of bits, or qubits?

You seem to attribute a strong role to perception which is generally outside physics but, I agree, may well be important for defining the mere idea of information. It seems to me that perception and measurements are closely related concepts, at least in the classical sense. In the past, I analyzed in great detail the relation beteween perception of time and phase locking

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0403020

May be you can read at least the conclusion to check if the idea fits your views.

Best wishes,

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 20:06 GMT
Many thank , Michel

With great pleasure to learn article you mentioned and discussed with you about it.

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share



Sreenath B N wrote on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 07:25 GMT
Dear Hoang,

Thanks for going through my essay. Can you, please, explain me how my conclusion is 'ill defined'?

I will read your essay and soon post my comments.

Sreenath.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 12:12 GMT
Dear Sreenath

Sorry if bother you, because I use the automatic translation of Google, "ill-defined" you can interim understand that is : "Difficult to determine" - mean: feel the problem more confusing after read your conclusion.

If anything is unclear, please remind me, sometimes there are some unfortunate problem is due to differences in language and grammar like that.

Regards

Bookmark and Share


Sreenath B N replied on Jun. 26, 2013 @ 09:23 GMT
Dear Hoàngcao,

I read your short but imposing essay with care. You are right when you say that ‘an absolute frame of reference’ is needed when we assess the reality of the physical world. This we find in classical as well as in quantum physics. Shortly I will rate your essay.

Sincerely,

Sreenath.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 26, 2013 @ 10:57 GMT
Hi Sreenath

Thank you, very happy about your visit.

Bookmark and Share



Author Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 26, 2013 @ 17:12 GMT
Send to all of you

THE ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AND A SMALL TEST FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT

After receiving the opinion of you, to avoid duplicate questions as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay, I will add a reply to you ;

1. What thing is new and the difference in the absolute theory than other theories?

2. Why can claim: all things are absolute - have not of relative ?

3. Why can confirm that the conclusions of the absolute theory is the most specific and detailed - and is unique?

4. How the applicability of the absolute theory in practice is ?

5. How to prove the claims of Absolute Theory?

Please be answer to you :

1. The first is concept of "Absolute" in my absolute theory is defined as: there is only one - do not have any similar - no two things exactly alike.

The most important difference of this theory is to build on the entirely new basis and different platforms compared to the current theory.

2. It can be affirmed that : can not have the two of status or phenomenon is the same exists in the same location in space and at the same moment of time - so thus: everything must be absolute and can not have any of relative . The relative only is a concept to created by our .

3. Conclusion of the absolute theory must always be unique and must be able to identify the most specific and detailed for all issues related to a situation or a phenomenon that any - that is the mandatory rules of this theory.

4. The applicability of the absolute theory is for everything - there is no limit on the issue and there is no restriction on any field - because: This theory is a method to determine for all matters and of course not reserved for each area.

5. To demonstrate - in fact - for the above statement,we will together come to a specific experience as well as to change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition and to demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory , I have a small testing - absolutely realistic - to you with title:

ABSOLUTE DETERMINATION TO RESOLVE FOR ISSUES REALITY

That is, based on my Absolute theory, I will help you determine by one new way to reasonable settlement and most effective for meet with difficulties of you - when not yet find out to appropriate remedies - for any problems that are actually happening in reality, only need you to clearly notice and specifically about the current status and the phenomena of problems included with requirements and expectations need to be resolved.

I may collect fees - by percentage of benefits that you get - and the commission rate for you, when you promote and recommend to others.

Condition : do not explaining for problems as impractical - no practical benefit - not able to determine in practice.

To avoid affecting the contest you can contact me via email : hoangcao_hai@yahoo.com

Hope will satisfy and bring real benefits for you along with the desire that we will find a common ground to live together in happily.

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share


Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 09:53 GMT
Add another problem, which is:

USE OF THE EQUATIONS AND FORMULA IN ESSAY

There have been some comments to me to questions is: why in my essay did not use the equations and formulas to interpret?

The reason is:

1. The currently equations and formulas are not able to solve all problems for all concerned that they represent.

2. Through research, I found: The application of the equations and formulas when we can not yet be determined the true nature of the problem will create new problems - there is even more complex and difficult to resolve than the original.

I hope so that : you will sympathetic and consideration to avoid misunderstanding my comments.

Bookmark and Share



Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 09:11 GMT
Dear Hải.Caohoàng,

Your efforts to discern the absolute is commendable. To settle things absolutely, the nature of space MUST be determined ABSOLUTELY. Is space discrete or continuous? Many have made a choice. Those who answer that space is discrete, don't give absolutely coherent answers, how. For example, 'what' does the separation or distinguishes the discrete representations of space? Can that discrete representation have parts? If not, can it have a shape? Noting that 'shape' is made of lines and curves, both of which are composite things.

Thanks for your comments on my blog.

Regards,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 01:59 GMT
Dear

Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon.

So you can produce material from your thinking. . . .

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 23:01 GMT
Many thank Akinbo and Satyavarapu , I appreciate your comments.

Bookmark and Share



Author Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 05:04 GMT
Many thank Akinbo and Satyavarapu , I appreciate your essay.

Bookmark and Share
post approved


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 17:22 GMT
"The answer is:It does not come from bits and the bits also did not born from it.

It is itself - it was born from the process activity of nature - because if there is no source of information dissemination, the information will not have to take over, and the bit is always available everywhere,so bit is not something that was born from it, the bit only absorb and transmission the impact from the source dispersal of information."

"It" is itself born from nature. I agree. Long after we disappear, atoms in stars will radiate photons. Our consciousness is not needed.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 00:12 GMT
Dear Jim

Thank you for watching essays, hope opinions and my rating will make you happy.

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share



Matthew N Lienem wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 18:41 GMT
Hello, Hai Caohoang

Some interesting discussion, but it seemed like it was a little outside the arena of physics. It is important to try to see what can be discerned as absolute so thanks for trying to do that. As for a matter of religion, well that's probably too touchy a discussion and not for here... but I think you're supporting the idea that we should all be humble, and if so that's a good thought.

Matthew

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 01:49 GMT
To Matthew N Lienem as well as all of readers

Thank you very much for that sincere opinion.

1. According to my point : When we have Physics is a considered measures of science to evaluate or determine for all the problems : so that will nothing lie outside its study field .

Absolute theory - or more precisely is the absolute viewpoint or absolute measures - have excess of ability to perform such tasks. My main problem now is : be must to put it application into practical for everyone to test , challenge and evaluate it.

2. As for the issues related to religion: My purpose is : the true science must be have the task of helping humanity truly understand religion and other spiritual perspectives - rather than trying to refute them .

Unfortunately, I seem to have created a sense of one people very not being modest, I've been thinking a lot about it, but can not be otherwise , still must be publish it as a challenge to all people. Because : humility - in this case (eg : vague statement, no definitive opinion ...) - will be the is synonymous with a lack of confidence, ambiguity, illusion, illusory. .. and of course does not fit the criteria called "absolute" as well as will not be able to demonstrate the ability to assert its superiority - If we are timid dare not affirm his belief,so our idea to giving of course there will have not value.

Hope all of you will understand and sympathize with what I was doing: I was very happy to find it and now just want to share to everyone - it is simply a belief in Truth, but it is excess of power for we to "get over myself" - I appreciate it is because of that.

Want that will get more many comments like this from all of you.

Bookmark and Share



Author Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 20:57 GMT
To Matthew N Lienem and all of you

Thank you very much for that sincere opinion.

1. According to my point : When we have Physics is a considered measures of science to evaluate or determine for all the problems : so that will nothing lie outside its study field .

Absolute theory - or more precisely is the absolute viewpoint or absolute measures - have excess of ability to perform such tasks. My main problem now is : be must to put it application into practical for everyone to test , challenge and evaluate it.

2. As for the issues related to religion: I noticed that : the true science must be have the task of helping humanity truly understand religion and other spiritual perspectives - rather than trying to refute them .

Unfortunately, I seem to have created a sense of one people very not being modest, I've been thinking a lot about it, and were found to choose : publish it as a challenge to all people. Because: humility - in this case (eg, vague statement, no definitive opinion ...) - will be the expression of a lack of confidence, ambiguity, illusion, illusory. .. and of course does not fit the criteria called "absolute".

Hope all of you will understand and sympathize with what I was doing: I was very happy to find it and now just want to share to everyone - it is simply a belief in Truth, but it is excess of power for we to "get over myself" - I appreciate it is because of that.

Want that will get more many comments like this from you.

Bookmark and Share
post approved


M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 20:29 GMT
Dear Hai,

thank you for your enthusiastic review of my entry and for your kind invitation to comment on your essay. Reading it, despite the difficulties understanding it, I sensed the strong conviction with which you present your ideas. And so, regarding the Absolute... I take a humble approach that Absolute is not for me to be known. Living in a very democratic society, I am well aware that there is no absolute truth to anything... I fact, my foremost approach is to see how, despite seeming contradictions, everyone is right -- each from his or her unique point of view. It is in this appreciation of plurality of opinions that I sometimes am able to grasp the essence of the underlying reality.

You address the most important question in the end of your essay: what makes us happy? Why do we live? (I intentionally simplify the terms so that the meaning will not be lost in automatic translation.) Those are the most pertinent questions, even though they lie outside of the current concerns of physics.

I do appreciate your humor in your generous offer to "collect fees" - by percentage of benefits that I will undoubtedly get - despite the favorable commission rate you promise, if I choose to promote and recommend to others your ideas. This sounds very tempting and I just may take your offer after the holidays (it's the 4th of July in the States!)

Again, thank you for your appreciation of my ideas and good luck to you in your quest of sharing your intimate knowledge of Absolute with the rest of humanity.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 00:01 GMT
Dear Vasilyeva

Thank you very much for attentive in your opinion,really is very nice to get the full opinion like this.

Bookmark and Share
post approved

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 00:28 GMT
And

It's unfortunate that you did not believe that : the really nature of everything are same is the Absolute. You "absolute" be yourself - can not resemble with anyone else . In any given social system too - the absolute to shows as : the stronger collective will have authority to decide for the rest - here too.

Anyway, very happy to know more about you.

Bookmark and Share
post approved

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 03:35 GMT
Dear Vasilyeva

Thank you very much for attentive in your opinion,really is very nice to get the full opinion like this.

It looks like you are very understand my expression, but do not understand what i am wanting to express.

Absolute Theory is a theory like all other theories - that is: its task is to determine the true nature of any particular issue - for example: the true nature of a social democracy is defined as "the people are the owner of society" and that is a absolute convention to can not be confused or equivalent with the other social institutions.

Anyway, very happy to know more about you.

Bookmark and Share



Stephen James Anastasi wrote on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 14:02 GMT
While difficult to read due to the writer’s present standard of English, the author’s efforts are clear. For example, the writer notes that human intelligence is not a limiting factor in teasing out foundational questions. I agree (not that by agreeing, the issue becomes any more true). The author would do well to read Kant with respect to limitations on the human condition in considering the world-as-it-is-in-itself, or Plato’s cave, and then build their thoughts into his own work, or show why their work does not apply.

The idea that final conclusions will depend on the testing is problematic in the context of foundational issues, insofar as Popper’s fallibilism would imply that one could never hold a theory to be absolute based on experiment. I touch briefly on this in my essay. For example, an ultimate theory must be complete from at least the beginning of time, prior to the Planck time, which implies knowledge of things that happened ontologically prior to the period where experiments might be valid.

I would be interested in seeing this work rethought in terms of the difference between empiricism and rationalism.

Quite original. Well done.

Stephen Anastasi.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 20:09 GMT
Dear to Stephen Anastasi together with all those who do not believe in an absolute result.

Although we have made how ​​many assumptions, would have only one the correct theory for everything - certainly that is the Truth.

Even when my absolute theory is not yet entirely true - the Truth would definitely also will be Absolute.

The Absolute of the Truth will make sure that no one can deny - as well as can not have anything are the similarities with it.

That is the meaning of the Absolute - that is the Truth.

How do you may reject this ?

Bookmark and Share



Anonymous wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 01:54 GMT
Hai,

Xin Chào. Thank you for your thought provoking essay.

I agree with you that we each consider ourselves to be absolute - the very fact that we exist. Our knowledge, however, is relative and is based upon discarding information about the web of interactions that give rise to our existence. By considering ourselves to be independently existing beings (0 entropy), we treat our perceived reality - "out there" - as also absolute.

This grand illusion breaks down at the quantum level. What is absolute is not our flickering consciousness nor the classical world of space and time but the quantum potential that brings us into being. And that truth encompasses not just our reality but all possible realities!

Thank you for reviewing my essay "A Complex Conjugate Bit and It", in which I discuss this process in detail.

Hen gap lai.

Richard Shand

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 07:49 GMT
Many thank Uncle Richard

Bookmark and Share



Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 11:30 GMT
Dear Hoang Cao Hai,

I think Richard sums your essay up well. It is a very interesting approach and the very fact that measurements have uncertainty sort of backs what you suggest.

Thanks for the comments over on my page too.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 20:21 GMT
Thanks for your comments , Antony

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING

that I mentioned in my essay is: we must review the scientific point of view that we are using to evaluate for everything - it is not entirely consistent because it is not able to help us identify specific and detailed for any problems - the main reason is: we have accepted the concept of relativity, equivalent or similar to be the results for all of the problems that we want to determine, so that although "no one is right" but also "not absolutely is wrong" and the fact that :

"MORE TRY TO LEARN MORE THEN DO NOT UNDERSTAND MORE"

Bookmark and Share


Antony Ryan replied on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 12:56 GMT
Thanks for the reply and clarifying this Hoang Cao Hai,

This is similar to the Einstein quote about knowledge.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Chris Granger wrote on Jul. 13, 2013 @ 21:26 GMT
Hoang,

Thanks for presenting this essay. While your essay may not address the fundamentals of the question as asked from a physics perspective, there are some intriguing aspects involving absolutism in interpretive conditions. The argument though that we have 'absolutes', at least in the way I am gathering from your presentation, suggests physical manifestations with exactness to mathematical abstractions which we cannot recognize via experiment, or something outside of physics which we thus cannot identify via physics. But that said, I would urge you to rewrite this essay with the intent of clarity, as you may not be communicating your ideas in the best mode here.

Chris

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 18:09 GMT
Dear Chris

To write a full post about what I want to mention, that probably will digress with our competitions. So I will expand with additional discussion would fit better.

Thank you again.

Bookmark and Share



Christian Corda wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 07:46 GMT
Dear Hoang,

As I promised in my Essay Page, I have read your Essay. Your provocative work gave me a lot of fun. In fact, I appreciate people like you who "think outside the box". Thus, I am going to give you an high score.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 18:12 GMT
Dear Christian

Really happy when get your empathy .

Bookmark and Share



Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 16:32 GMT
Hoang,

After finally getting around to reading your essay, it made me wonder why it is not rated higher? Then I read your conclusion and found out why. You referred to the GOD theory and that is a no-no in physics. Funny thing about the GOD theory is that it provides a model of what causality is, something (physical universe) from nothing (non-physical origin), without the moral and religious baggage commonly associated with it.

Your statement, "It seems that the issue is purely about "perception" rather than by the level of knowledge or ability of our intelligence.", I find is dead on! The 'empirical evidence' obtained from the recently concluded 12 year experiment show that 'absolute' determinism is NOT about the perception of states being certain. It goes much deeper than that.

I have some questions to run by you via email if I may. What is you email address? My email address is: msm@physicsofdestiny.com

I look forward to hearing back from you.

Regards,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 18:40 GMT
Dear Manuel

Thank you very much for your thoughtful attention.

Your comments seem to show the difference in way of seeing things , between me and you.

As discussed with Matthew N Lienem above: "As for the issues related to religion: My purpose is : the true science must be have the task of helping humanity truly understand religion and other spiritual perspectives - rather than trying to refute them ."

That meaning is : Physics is the basis of science, so a theoretical foundation of physics would have to be: there is no limit on the issue and there is no restriction on the scope.

Another problem is: the level of my English poor sometimes cause some misunderstandings, hope you will sympathy and ask further when to find something confusing in my post.

Thank you again. My email : hoangcao_hai@yahoo.com

Bookmark and Share


Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 20:41 GMT
And more

I tried to read your essay being curious by your"12 year experiment" and I understand why you disagree with my absolute opinion .

You said it all just random - no rules - through the example of a coin placed on the mouth of the cup .

Your conclusion is so careless, because: the coin will fall on the direction which its focus being toward (as direction to focus of gravity) - which means: always be must have the rule or principle for everything - and it's the absolute that I want to talk to you.

I also understand your question, the absolute answer would be : whether any state can be formed must also follow a certain principle - absolutely no random coincidence - " the random "is just a concept was born because we did not thoroughly studied.

Good Luck!

Bookmark and Share



john stephan selye wrote on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 14:45 GMT
Hello -

You are right in many ways: The history of science - and of everything else for that matter - shows us that there are no absolutes.

I also believe the Human observer is involved in shaping the reality he perceives to a greater degree than can be accounted for strictly by physics.

However, this influence of the observer affects physics itself.

I was intrigued by your focus, and impressed by your conviction. I have benefitted from reading your essay, and have rated it; I think you will also benefit from reading mine, and await you opinion.

Good Luck!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 05:06 GMT
Hello john

I had read your essay and also was rated it.

Many thanks and wish you luck.

Bookmark and Share



Author Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 05:20 GMT
Additional reading references

SOME TYPICAL ON DISCUSSION

1.Opinion question of Paul N Butler : The problem is that we cannot access absolute reality to get the answers directly from it.

- ANSWER : Absolutely right, we are only one measure is: to use the ability of their own thinking along with the assessment based on the fact of Nature.

2. Andrej Rehak : it is not a theory but the principle.

- ANSWER : which is the difference in my theory-I use the principle as criteria for measures.

3. Israel Perez : I recommend that you implement calculations in your theory.

- ANSWER : I also know it is very necessary, but maybe I'll just add the calculated after resolved the criticism of the theory - in fact, I have already prepared.

4. Basudeba Mishra : Regarding fees, we do not believe in selling knowledge. Hence we are not interested in the monetary part.

- ANSWER : it seems you do not understand my purpose.

We do not sell the knowledge that it is the expression of the practical application of knowledge. Get real income will shows that a knowledge be have valuable on the fact or not - that is the most accurate assessment.

We do not research to pass the time or to satisfy for the demands unrealizable - as a literary movement - we do that because we feel : the problem is still not acceptable.

5. Sergio Miguel : Let me tell you I have a problem with your claim that the relative is created by us. Einstein showed that the position and the time of an event are relative to the observer but it is not because we created but due to the system of reference of the observer. It means it is relative to the position and the time of the observer, so space and time is intrinsically relative.

- ANSWER : Perhaps the wording by the English language of me did to you do not understand for problem that i want to address.

The difference between my absolute theory and the relativity theory as well as with other theories are : The Absolute nature of everything is not dependent on the observation or assessment of any body - or any position - that is the result of my research before deciding to build the Absolute Theory .

6. Willard Mittelman : I highly recommend a reading of his paper, especially for those who want a fuller understanding of the issues raised in my own essay.

- ANSWER : My theory using a new basis should certainly not use the old basics - because reality shows: they are irrational and can not afford to specify for all problem.

7. MV Vasilyeva : Living in a very democratic society, I am well aware that there is no absolute truth to anything... I fact

- ANSWER : It looks like you are very understand my expression, but do not understand what i am wanting to express.

Absolute Theory is a theory like all other theories - that is: its task is to determine the true nature of any particular issue - for example: the true nature of a social democracy is defined as "the people are the owner of society" and that is a absolute convention to can not be confused or equivalent with the other social institutions.

The absolute in any society that is: whether democracy or monarchy - that society is also will absolute only one type of "boss".

You absolute are yourself - can not be any exceptions or any equivalent.

The presence and your existence will absolute is not the dependent on observation, feeling or assessment of any person - whether it's about more than 6 billion people be still not yet to known to you.

You can be also ever have that thought.

8. Manuel S Morales : After finally getting around to reading your essay, it made me wonder why it is not rated higher? Then I read your conclusion and found out why. You referred to the GOD theory and that is a no-no in physics. Funny thing about the GOD theory is that it provides a model of what causality is, something (physical universe) from nothing (non-physical origin), without the moral and religious baggage commonly associated with it.

- ANSWER : As discussed with Matthew N Lienem above: "As for the issues related to religion: My purpose is : the true science must be have the task of helping humanity truly understand religion and other spiritual perspectives - rather than trying to refute them ."

That meaning is : Physics is the basis of science, so a theoretical foundation of physics would have to be: there is no limit on the issue and there is no restriction on the scope.

Another problem is: the level of my English poor sometimes cause some misunderstandings, hope you will sympathy and ask further when to find something confusing in my post.

Thank you again. My email : hoangcao_hai@yahoo.com

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 19:02 GMT
Dear Hoàngcao,

In a probability density function absoluteness of a probability itself is probabilistic. Absoluteness is the property of continuum in infinity and not with discrete. Thus, information is continuum in nature.

With best wishes

Jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 12:38 GMT
Dear Uncle 3J

All the results be has its own cause, so will absolute nothing is coincidence - because: duplicate results is due same cause - so absolute is no so-called "probabilistic"to be able to calculate, because it will become a kind of "luck and risks", if anyone believes in probabilities, let go to the casino then will see results.

Hope that Uncle will not try to do so , even if everyone wish to Uncle be "good luck".

Bookmark and Share



eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 18:57 GMT
Dear Hoang,

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 Hoang cao Hai replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 19:31 GMT
Thank you very much, I also read and rate your essay.

Bookmark and Share



Margriet Anne O'Regan wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 12:31 GMT
Hi Hoang - from Margriet O'Regan

You queried about my qualifying 'geometric objects' as being 'properly' present here in our universe. What I mean by this is that the geometric objects to which I refer in my essay are not abstract or hypothetical ones as are the geometric objects inside mathematicians & theorectical physicists minds & textbooks.

I enjoyed your essay - I too believe that the creator created everything & created information along with matter altogether at the same time.

Cheers,

Margriet O'Regan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Hoang cao Hai replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 19:41 GMT
Thankyou Margriet , It was happy when get your empathy.

Bookmark and Share



Author Hoang cao Hai wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 17:56 GMT
Dear to all - A SIMPLE CHALLENGE

On the occasion of the end of "community rate" I would sent to all of you a fundamental challenge : that's the problem: RELATIVE or ABSOLUTE ? :

Can you give an example about the nature of anything is relative?

And the result would surely be : you can not prove.

That is absolutely remarkable advantage of my Absolute theory.

Hải.Caohoàng

Bookmark and Share



Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 19:27 GMT
Dear Hải.Caohoàng,

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 Hoang cao Hai wrote on Oct. 16, 2013 @ 02:03 GMT
Sincere thanks to all of you, whether it is praise or criticism.

Hải.Caohoàng

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.