FQXi Community

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

Current Essay Contest

Guidelines

FAQ

Essays: read and discuss

Latest FQXi news

Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Previous Contests

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest
December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020
Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discuss • winners

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

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/discuss • winners

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/discuss • winners

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/discuss • winners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners

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/discuss • winners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discuss • winners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discuss • winners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

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

Hon Jia Koh: on 12/29/13 at 2:43am UTC, wrote As promised earlier, here is the longer newer version of the essay on...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 19:28pm UTC, wrote Dear Hon Jia, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the...

Peter Jackson: on 8/5/13 at 11:36am UTC, wrote Dear Hon Jia, Anthony Ryan suggested I read your essay and I'm very glad I...

Antony Ryan: on 8/4/13 at 3:38am UTC, wrote Dear Hon Jia, Thanks for the comments above - I've only just made it back...

Antony Ryan: on 8/4/13 at 3:36am UTC, wrote Dear Hon Jia, It certainly is interesting - I'd like to hear more! I'd be...

Stephen Anastasi: on 7/28/13 at 8:45am UTC, wrote Dear Hon Jia While I have a different perspective, I read your essay with...

Akinbo Ojo: on 7/26/13 at 11:12am UTC, wrote Dear Hon Jia, Pardon my starting another thread as this matter is...

Vladimir Rogozhin: on 7/24/13 at 7:59am UTC, wrote Dear Hon Jia, I invite you to comment my essay on my forum and rate it. I...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Rick Lockyer: "Our discussion is smogging up Singh’s blog, so I will leave you with..." in Towards the unification...

Stefan Weckbach: "Rick, I have facts, not opinions. One fact is that browsing here and at the..." in Towards the unification...

Georgina Woodward: "This is a repeat of earlier posts. Scott, your thinking is currently..." in Understanding...

Steve Dufourny: "The technological environmentalism seems a key also. The potential of our..." in Global Collaboration

Lorraine Ford: "Thanks Steve." in Understanding...

RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Time to Think
Philosopher Jenann Ismael invokes the thermodynamic arrow of time to explain how human intelligence emerged through culture.

Lockdown Lab Life
Grounded physicists are exploring the use of online and virtual-reality conferencing, and AI-controlled experiments, to maintain social distancing. Post-pandemic, these positive innovations could make science more accessible and environmentally-friendly.

Is Causality Fundamental?
Untangling how the human perception of cause-and-effect might arise from quantum physics, may help us understand the limits and the potential of AI.

Building Agency in the Biology Lab
Physicists are using optogenetics techniques to make a rudimentary agent, from cellular components, which can convert measurements into actions using light.

Think Quantum to Build Better AI
Investigating how quantum memory storage could aid machine learning and how quantum interactions with the environment may have played a role in evolution.

read & discuss all articles

FQXi FORUM

January 23, 2021

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: The Precursor to Information, Life and Universe by Hon Jia Koh [refresh]

Author Hon Jia Koh wrote on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 16:02 GMT

Essay Abstract

To understand and perceive everything about the Universe, it will require a conscious system as big as the Universe, or every bit of information it possesses. But to understand and appreciate the basic truth and reality of the Universe, it may only require a system as simple as us, for simplicity is at the basis of truth and reality. Seeing information in its basic elementary form instead of composite form will unshroud our common sense or normal perception into reality.

Author Bio

I have always been curious about the truth of nature and seeking the truth seems like the most natural and comforting thing to do. After completing my Master degree in Physics, I needed to return home instead of continuing my PhD. I consider it a good thing as I continue to ponder about nature and life anytime, anywhere, anyhow and I get to learn from readily available reading sources, people, nature and my kids.

Download Essay PDF File

Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 15:32 GMT

Mr. Koh,

I found your essay to be extremely well crafted. Your subdued, contemplative style was truly refreshing. I even found an agreement in your essay to my essay BITTERS, when you wrote: “Quarks are shy creatures. They either exist inside protons and neutrons or they only appear very briefly under very rare and unique circumstances.”

I believe that everything in the real Universe is unique.

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 07:34 GMT

Thanks Joe. I enjoy reading yours and the idea you expounded on uniqueness of reality. I was trying to make a similar point in the last Statement in the essay. I believe it holds the key to seeing how physical beings come about and it would be interesting to ponder how or why it has to be unique and not otherwise.

It is wonderful to see such a diversity of ideas, some of them similar and perhaps converging from different pathways. Hope to see the day when we and most people will see the subdue beauty and essence of the basic truth, in their unique ways no doubt, and towards a better destiny.

Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 13:02 GMT

Hi Hon Jia Koh,

The initial parts of your essay resonate well with me. Such parts like, "To unravel the meaning of information, we need to take a rather bold step to differentiate information that are at the composite form ...from information at the simplest or essentially elementary-like form, which do not involve composite systems of particles,energies or forces".

But areas like "reduce all matter in the universe to a single-point…"

and "…. point-like entities" I will not accept without your proving or explaining such possibility. By 'point-like' do you mean zero dimension? If so, you can count me out. But if you mean, a very small but non-zero dimension, count me in. You will see my reasons in my essay.

You, say "in the elementary realm, time is non-existence and inconsequential".

If Leibniz tells you that monads can emerge from nothing and can annihilate to nothing, it follows that they exist for some lifetime. On what basis then do you say time is non-existent in the elementary realm?

Anyway, not a bad essay.

Regards,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 17:04 GMT

Hi Akinbo,

Ever since I joined the education field a few years ago, I start to appreciate the dialectic process of knowledge construction. There are much to learn from your fluid writing style, approach and wealth of knowledge.

The example of "reduce all matter in the universe to a single-point…" was not meant to suggest its possibility. It was used as an hypothetical example or thought experiment to explain that it is meaningless or self-deprecating to have a single-point existence.

Like you, I don't actually believe in point-like entity if it refers to a real entity with zero dimension. If I may use the definition of 'line' and 'surface' used in your essay, a line without breath is unreal and only exist in imagination or calculation. By extension, the point-like extremities of the line, with or without division, is unreal. Similarly, a surface without depth is unreal, as it is merely an extension of lines without breath. This is the idea I was trying to discuss, that two point-like entities can only make a line-like (a line without breath) hypothetical presence. A third entity or presence is necessary to give it the required 'depth', at least in our observable Uinverse.

Incidently I reached the argument that time is a perception (but useful and meaningful still) and could be absolvable in the fundamental physical realm before I made the maiden attempt to write an essay from bits and pieces of years of scribblings and doodlings. It was thus delightful to discover Barbour's 2008 winning FQXi essay on The Nature of Time after submitting the essay. In it, he made an eloquent case (mathematically) for the 'constituent' of time, and time took a backseat. In my hypothetical case, if one would attempt to remove from the human- or living-centric perception of reality, and imagine being a simple particle with only say physical presence that is describable by a coordinate system, what is the meaning of time then.

I ventured to write a humble (probably ended clumsy looking to many) essay with a deliberate attempt to unshroub or at least reduce our common sensical and human-centric tendency to sense making, reductional or deterministic reasoning, and to avoid sophisticated approaches, tackling the nuauces of the physical world, enjoyed by the few but remote to most people. However I do wish I am better equiped in mathematics to appeal or reach to some audiences.

There are many great thinkers in human history. If only they have had the technological affordances and knowledge resources we have today, and we have less distraction and more time.

Cheers,

Hon Jia

view post as summary

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 02:55 GMT

Dear Hon Jia Koh

You present very thoughtful but conclusion not definitive , "perhaps" you are not really confident.

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

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh wrote on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 08:13 GMT

Dear Hoangcai Hai,

Thanks for the comment. The inclination of the essay was towards the reader making up their own ideas rather than stating my belief to them.

In a way, the effort to define the context of the essay's argument in a simple (non-composite/elementary) physical information system was an exercise similar to the 'Absolute' criteria approach in your essay, in order to reach a more definitive single answer. Until the point of the interpretation of time and space my stand can be said to be 'absolute', beyond that and towards the end of the essay on the pre-reality concept it is hypothetical at this moment.

The progress of human knowledge and enculturation has led to numerous distinction and separation of various sort, like subject areas of knowledge etc. And this in turn has led to seeing things from a particular area or level that may have been 'diluted' or 'convoluted'. Hence the 'absolute' criteria can become useful.

There are still some gaps and unproven ideas being scattered around in my essay that I hope someone would take up to resolve, prove or disprove someday. I will put up a slightly longer and more nuanced essay later on in a website I have built for sharing/spreading of ideas for the education communities.

Regards,

Hon Jia

basudeba mishra wrote on Jun. 23, 2013 @ 01:56 GMT

Dear Sir,

In our essay “Information Hides in the Glare of Reality” published on May 31, we have given the definition and mechanism of perception and observables. Much of it matches the first part of your essay. But when you talk about fitting into the rabbit hole to enter into a non-existent land and getting information out of it, you are transgressing perception and entering into the field of dreams. Compilation of information (pool) is bound by physical rules and all combinations are not permitted (eigenvalues). Inside an atom, the number of neutrons cannot exceed a specific ratio. This is the difference of wakeful state from the dream state, where, in the absence of external stimuli, no such restrictions (compiler) apply to the stored information in memory. Since we cannot physically enter a basket ball sized hole to enter our fantasy land, the ‘information’ about it is possible only in dreams and not in reality. We have defined information precisely.

Information is the reporting (result of measurement) of the state of something (self-contained representation) through a communicable language phrased in terms of algorithms (sequence of symbols) executed on certain computing machines or living beings. Thus, it has three components: the observer, the observable and the mechanism of observation, the result of which is communicated through language. But information and observer cannot be exchanged. The observer disseminates information and not the other way round. The heavier quarks appear and vanish due to physical reasons. These are independent events relating to their temporal evolution that are reported through observation by the observer at specific instants. Your other statements should be viewed in this light.

Regards,

basudeba

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh replied on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 16:17 GMT

Dear Basudeba,

Thanks for the comment. There are several points in your essay that are very interesting and perhaps I will discuss over at your side.

On your comment that "information and observer cannot be exchanged" where I stated otherwise, I believe we are referring to two different contexts. In the widely accepted context such as making a measurement, processing or exchanging information, energy transfer or conversation and entropy changes, I agree that indeed information and observer cannot be exchanged. The context in which I stated such an absurd (and probably unheard of) idea where information and observer are interchangeable refer to a state where they are different from our usual composite state (eg. involving different type of interaction and physical constituent) and known physical entities. The use of the word and meaning of information and observer is probably the closest they will be to their usual counterparts, otherwise there are pretty different.

It my essay, it begins with many ideas that are similar to some of the other essays and these ideas take a rather different (and irrational) trajectory from them eventually.

Cheers,

Hon Jia

Antony Ryan wrote on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 03:21 GMT

Dear Hon Jia Koh,

I thought your statements and especially your diagrams were very well utilised. I'm keen myself on the horizons where information cannot be reached, such as the Fibonacci Black Holes in my essay. I think there is an equivalence between these and your 'Planck Speed' idea. I hope you get the opportunity to read through my work too.

Great essay - all the best!

Antony

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh replied on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 03:19 GMT

Thanks Antony. Your essay is a refreshing great read. The use of dimension as pathway for information travel at event horizon is inspiring. A missing part of my essay which I wish to discuss more is about how information, matter and energy translate (travel) and develop (change) over spacetime.

The ability to extend the use of a well-studied area like Fibonacci Sequence to a new horizon is impressive. Mathematics phenomenons have a sublime beauty in manifesting and explaining observable nature that capture the imagination of many great people. Challenging their hidden mysteries and limits could be rewarding and illuminating. From Pythagoras up until before Bernhard Riemann and Einstein, Pythagorean theorem was taken to imply that space was flat as opposed to curved.

Cheers,

Hon Jia

Antony Ryan replied on Jun. 30, 2013 @ 12:48 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

Wow - thanks for your lovely comments - I am very humbled & grateful!

I would be delighted to discuss more about how information and matter translate over spacetime.

I was very interested in your Planck speed approach and think it makes good logical sense.

All the very best,

Antony

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh replied on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 16:52 GMT

Thanks for the interest and open mindedness. I am still unlearning and relearning many things, and trying to get slower at plunging to conclusion or domain expertise (if any) quickly and efficiently, which many aptly busy people and scientists seem to have surpassed for good.

Although the word 'speed' is used, treat it as a state of motion or state of change of location (displacement and perturbation were also used in the essay). If we see reality (Universe) as at only one state at any one 'time' (similar to what other essays described as the quality of being unique, absolute etc.), the location of a real/observable entity is never the same from the one 'before' or 'after'. See such a change as giving rise to the physical properties experienced by other real entities. Put this and apply into the relevant context such as elementary or composite, gravitational or electromagnetic, scalar or non-scalar, particle matter or energy etc.

When there is an ensemble or amalgamation of particles, their collective state of motion should produce interesting effects, and I am exploring Bose-Einstein condensate, super-fluidity and super-conductivity. Take for example super-conductivity. Could these collective ("synchronise") state of motions (in a localised zone in this case, briefly mentioned as "fixation.." instead of localisation in the essay) at special conditions (usually low temperature etc.) produced pathways/dimensions for the zero resistance effect observed? If state of motion of particles can create pathways (or conversely opening "holes/tunnels" in the normally known pathways), it is probable that particles' state of motion interact at a basic and intrinsic level with the platform for translation or travel of particles.

On another end imagine a large collective random ("non-synchronise") state of motions from a large amalgamation of particles like the Earth and the immediate physical property that come to mind which is commonly called gravity. Also imagine placing the particles making up the Earth one by one, side by side in a line (it would stretch very long indeed). What 'gravity' would we get?

As mentioned in the essay, quantum entanglement is a plausible place to look at and I may discuss how it relates to the above concept if it is still interesting.

Cheers,

Hon Jia

view post as summary

show all replies (1 not shown)

Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jun. 26, 2013 @ 13:59 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

I enjoyed reading your essay. I think we're going next, and in the same direction in the search for truth. Yes, unfortunately, not everyone loves the dialectic of the formation and the generation of new structures. You did well conclude: «When information return to their primordial form (as IOs), they may become new IOs and need not be the same as before. This little bit of changes in the IOs is perhaps the precursor to the birth of a new universe. »I give high marks for your lateral thinking and unconventional ideas. Good luck and respect, Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh replied on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 14:07 GMT

Dear Vladimir,

The feeling is mutual. If I may suggest, it will be great to read your essay as a precursor to mine. There are so many ideas and examples that strike a chord, from R. Grosseteste's "...a sensual knowledge is not a knowledge, but a path to it. Because human knowledge is more likely to occur on the relationship of sensual knowledge with understanding" to "Ideal reality objectively exists and it is manifested in fundamental constants and laws, its sustainability" and finally "Ontological structuring of dialectic ...leads to the conclusion that in addition to parametric information units , , one shall introduce a new information unit representing the idea of generating new structures and meanings.."

I liked the ending paragraph and empathized with the quotes of A. Einstein and J. Wheeler in it.

Best,

Hon Jia

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 04:43 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

report post as inappropriate

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 01:51 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

report post as inappropriate

James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:25 GMT

Hon,

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

report post as inappropriate

John Brodix Merryman wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 18:08 GMT

Hon Jia,

This is a very insightful and educated essay, but I have some issues with current cosmology that you seem to take for granted and thus incorporate into your thinking. Rather than try to analyze the entire field, just consider the idea of black holes; They are a gravitational model, of which the prime examples presumably reside at the heart of galaxies. Now obviously the effect of gravity is pervasive all across the radius of a galaxy and so the actual black hole, where the field is too strong for light to escape, is simply where the curve goes completely off the edge. So galaxies are gravity wells, yet what is the mathematical description of all the light radiating away from them, to match the gravitational curvature of mass falling in? You are very astute at thinking contextually, yet this is an idea that is completely out of context. Not only do galaxies both pull mass in and radiate light out, but those black holes shoot enormous jets of cosmic rays extremely far out into intergalactic space. To me, there is a complete cycle of expanding energy and contracting mass and I think we will eventually find this is as perfectly balanced as it appears to be because it is such a natural cycle. Which means there is no need for any of those patches, such as inflation, dark matter, dark energy, etc, required to hold together the theory of a universe beginning at a point, based on out of context observations, in the face of much contradictory evidence.

I think we will eventually find light to be Einstein's cosmological constant; That which balances the contraction of mass. And that it travels as an expanding wave, not a dimensionless point.

I can continue this, but it would take several pages to cover many of the details and so I'll leave it at that for the moment. I find most people with degrees in physics do not like debating such basic points, so I will let you think this through to see if you consider it worth discussing.

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh replied on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 05:00 GMT

John,

Indeed in the attempt to cover too much with too little in the essay, it tends to get out of focus. Black hole is interesting to look at and its a pity we know too little of it for now. Going to basic points is important. Many education systems tend to gross over it for greater efficiency etc.

Let's treat the whole observable universe as in only one overall state and frame all the while. When the state or frame changes, the state of motion or state of location or relative position (displacement) of all particles changes. There are local state of motion or displacement and global state of displacement which is relativistic (don't treat this as Einstein's relativity, keep it open still). Local state of motions give rise to and interact with energy and light-speed phenomenon , which in turn manifest as contraction of length or mass and dilation of time in the frame of the global state of displacement...

John Brodix Merryman replied on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 17:45 GMT

Hon Jia,

The concept of relativity has been co-opted by what is an ingenious device to incorporate temporal sequence into a foundational model, rather than having it emerge as a natural effect. We naturally tend to believe what those who come before teach us, yet prior generations were working with smaller knowledge bases, so what seems like a useful patch to a minor problem can become a large obstacle to further progress, if it doesn't conform to the actual reality. Sometimes progress is evolutionary and sometimes it is revolutionary. Given the current situation, we are in need of a revolution.

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 09:07 GMT

John,

Given the current situation, our best bet is probably in the next generation if transformation of the education system comes in time.

Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 07:47 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

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

Regards and good luck in the contest,

Sreenath BN.

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

report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 07:59 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

I invite you to comment my essay on my forum and rate it. I gave your essay and your ideas excellent rating 26.06.

Best regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 11:12 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

Pardon my starting another thread as this matter is unrelated to your essay. Also I don't know whether you are a relationist/substantivalist.

Is it being implied by the relational view of space and as suggested by Mach's principle that what decides whether a centrifugal force would act between two bodies in *constant relation*, would not be the bodies themselves, since they are at fixed distance to each other, nor the space in which they are located since it is a nothing, but by a distant sub-atomic particle light-years away in one of the fixed stars in whose reference frame the *constantly related* bodies are in circular motion?

NOTE THAT in no other frame can circular motion between the bodies be described in this circumstance except in the 'observing' sub-atomic particle.

Best regards,

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

Stephen James Anastasi wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 08:45 GMT

Dear Hon Jia

While I have a different perspective, I read your essay with interest. Nice to see you having a go with such a challenging topic.

Best wishes

Stephen Anastasi.

report post as inappropriate

Antony Ryan wrote on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 03:38 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

Thanks for the comments above - I've only just made it back to your thread, so I've replied above. I've also rated your essay very highly because I think you deserve a higher position for your original approach!

Best wishes in the contest and in your research,

Antony

report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 11:36 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

Anthony Ryan suggested I read your essay and I'm very glad I did in time to rate it. I think it's a beautifully crafted analysis with great value and without trying to 'push' some speculative notion. I agree with Anthony it is worth a much higher score and am very glad to apply same.

I find I agree all your ten statements, particularly Statement 5; Elementary information can only be observed by the elementary co-dependent observer directly. I find this has hidden meaning, the foundations of which are described in my previous two essays here (both 7th place finishers but not following doctrine or favoured by the judges). You will also find a physical ontological derivation of the 'eternal loop' you describe, which is part of the ontology, described here; Helical CMB anisotropy and the Recycling Model.

I hope you also have time to read and score mine. It is ambitionus, but Please ignore the too dense abstract. the blog posts so far give a more flattering picture including; "groundbreaking", "clearly significant", "astonishing", "fantastic job", "wonderful", "remarkable!", "deeply impressed", etc. It suggests new and more coherent answers to some of the main questions you ask.

Very well done and thank you for yours. It was an absolute delight to read.

Peter

report post as inappropriate

Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 19:28 GMT

Dear Hon Jia,

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

report post as inappropriate

Author Hon Jia Koh wrote on Dec. 29, 2013 @ 02:43 GMT

As promised earlier, here is the longer newer version of the essay on learnXscape.