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

Richard Kingsley-Nixey: on 8/22/13 at 13:22pm UTC, wrote Gene, Glad you enjoyed it. I agree about the Planck scale. OK for 'matter'...

Gene Barbee: on 8/8/13 at 12:16pm UTC, wrote Hi Richard, Thanks for reading my essay and yes I read Peter Jackson's...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 21:56pm UTC, wrote Dear Richard, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the...

Richard Kingsley-Nixey: on 8/7/13 at 12:15pm UTC, wrote Manuel, Thank you. I did read and award your essay some good points some...

Richard Kingsley-Nixey: on 8/1/13 at 13:11pm UTC, wrote Akinbo, Questions are fine. All my answers are yes. I much enjoyed your...

Manuel Morales: on 7/23/13 at 3:20am UTC, wrote Richard, I found your essay thought provoking and very much in keeping...

Akinbo Ojo: on 7/18/13 at 14:06pm UTC, wrote Hello Richard, Your conclusion It from Bit agrees with Wheeler. I agree as...

Richard Kingsley-Nixey: on 7/17/13 at 13:42pm UTC, wrote Hugh, I'll try to check out your and Royce's essays. The experiment sounds...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "Isn't symmetry simply closely related to redundancy even if physicist may..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Robert Rise: "Meet many types of women on ihookup. Some dates better than others. It is..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Steve Dufourny: "FQXI you too I need your help, come all too we have a work to do there..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "lol REVOLUTION SPHERISATION everywhere at all scales,REVOLUTION..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "The kind of time required, over which the material change is happening, (to..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "after all like Borh has made,this universe and its spheres for me are like..." in Alternative Models of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 23, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: How Big a Bit of It are we? by Richard Kingsley Nixey [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Richard Kingsley Nixey wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 17:50 GMT
Essay Abstract

We point out the lack of any compelling evidence that mankind is of 'high' absolute intelligence, and the considerable evidence that Einstein was correct in suggesting that we understand almost infinitely little. We then examine the postulate that the universe is an experimental 'quantum computer' and that mankind is a minor incidental component in a complex and evolving quantum processing network. We visit the scenario and find that no evidence to the contrary stands examination. As the likely motivation implicit in that proposal is considered more likely than any other we conclude that It is from Bit.

Author Bio

Biochemist and Applied Biologist, BSC Hons. Biochemistry, Brunel, UK. For full bio see last years essay.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



basudeba mishra wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 06:19 GMT
Dear Sir,

Congratulations for a beautiful essay with lot of food for thought. We have covered the dark energy and dark matter aspect in our essay published on May 31. Here we are giving extensions to your essay.

There are other anomalies brought out by ESA’s ‘Planck’ findings as well. For example, expansion rate of the universe - the Hubble constant - has been revised to 67.15...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 20, 2013 @ 15:35 GMT
Mr. Nixey,

I regret I do not have any words in my vocabulary to accurately describe your essay. Terrific and fantastic and superbly written are insultingly inadequate.

As a creaky old realist, May I humbly make one comment? Like Lee Smolin, I too think that one real Universe must be unique, once. In my essay BITTERS, I have listed the absolutes the Universe abides by. There is one absolute I omitted.

The absolute of real life is understanding. By that I mean that a real ant can only understand how to be a real ant. Unfortunately, it is impossible for a real man to understand how to be a real man. Man much prefers that his brain be filled with abstract intoxication to ever being real.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Richard William Kingsley-Nixey replied on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 12:57 GMT
Joe,

Thanks, I agree with your idea. But surely plenty of real men can be ants?

R

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Brodix Merryman wrote on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 02:07 GMT
Richard,

It is a clear and well written essay. If I may be so presumptuous to offer some ideas to consider:

Why are we here? This implies intent and direction. Fact is the absolute is basis, not apex, so the source of our being is not some intentional ideal from which we descend, but the raw essence of beingness from which we rise. Reasonably its intention is equally basic, to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Richard William Kingsley-Nixey replied on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 13:00 GMT
John,

Thanks. I'm not entirely sure I see the real central point of your idea, but I didn't object to anything I found.

R

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 21, 2013 @ 03:12 GMT
Dear Richard

"It from bit" - where bit from?

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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 04:50 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


Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 20:16 GMT
Dear Richard,

A really enjoyable and fascinating essay. So it seems it really doesn't matter whether we're an advanced computer or not, there's no necessary assumption of pre-determination of our lives in any case. It also of course resolves a lot of other unanswerable questions.

So we only have to ask do the technicians also know the answers to those questions? Do they go to church on Sundays?

You may with to read Manuel Morales essay. Who was it made the selection to create the computer? I also hope you'll read and comment on mine.

Of course I'm sure you wrote it rather tongue in cheek, and an excellent job too. For proper rigour somebody does have to properly check out the implications of all options.

Congratulations. I see your score so far is derisory and I'm pleased to aid it's rise to more appropriate number.

Best of luck

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Richard William Kingsley-Nixey replied on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 13:03 GMT
Peter,

Thanks. I thought your own essay was exceptional. It was so rich plan to read it again and will comment on your blog then.

R

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 01:46 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


James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:30 GMT
Richard,

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


Richard William Kingsley-Nixey wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 13:05 GMT
May I say to all I don't think 'mass posts' are appropriate and will not put those essays ay the top of my list to read.

R

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hugh Matlock wrote on Jul. 15, 2013 @ 21:32 GMT
Hi Richard,

Thanks for a very enjoyable read! You wrote:

1. "The chamber is filled with the finest incompressible ethereal medium called 'Darkenagy' at just below dew-point. Introducing one tiniest spinning particulate impurity then starts a chain reaction."

Take a look at Royce Haynes' essay for a nice take on this scenario.

2. "A beautiful series of tiny vortices start to appear, spinning ever faster then contracting almost to a point before flowing out of the sides; re-emerging on a perpendicular axis and starting to rotate yet again on the new axis. Examining these closely the process can be seen as a fractal."

This is also part of my picture, although I was not as poetic about it.

3.The only motivation available seems to be on the 'it from bit' side!

The question of motivation is a great question to use as a tie-breaker.

The conclusion in my essay Software Cosmos was "It from Bit and Bit from Us". You will find there a proposal for how to construct a simulation of the cosmos, and an experiment I have conducted to tell whether we are currently within such a simulation.

4. "Douglas Adams brilliantly found, when coming to the logical conclusion consistent with out own, that we then need to find the question."

Paraphrasing you: "If we are the answer, what was the question?"

Marvelous question! Wish I knew....

Hugh

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Richard William Kingsley-Nixey replied on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 13:42 GMT
Hugh,

I'll try to check out your and Royce's essays. The experiment sounds most interesting. The best questions i've found so far are in the McHarris and Jackson essays, both also pointing to important answers. it seems tough at the top this year!

Richard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 14:06 GMT
Hello Richard,

Your conclusion It from Bit agrees with Wheeler. I agree as well. Probably there is a mix up in understanding what Bit is and how come an It can be derived therefrom. A good score to be expected. By the way, if you don't mind can you answer below questions. The way I posed these 4 questions seem to have offended a few so I rephrase

"If you wake up one morning and dip your hand in your pocket and 'detect' a million dollars, then on your way back from work, you dip your hand again and find that there is nothing there…

1) Have you 'elicited' an information in the latter case?

2) If you did not 'participate' by putting your 'detector' hand in your pocket, can you 'elicit' information?

3) If the information is provided by the presence of the crisp notes ('its') you found in your pocket, can the absence of the notes, being an 'immaterial source' convey information?

Finally, leaving for the moment what the terms mean and whether or not they can be discretely expressed in the way spin information is discretely expressed, e.g. by electrons

4) Can the existence/non-existence of an 'it' be a binary choice, representable by 0 and 1?"

Answers can be in binary form for brevity, i.e. YES = 1, NO = 0, e.g. 0-1-0-1.

Best regards,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Richard William Kingsley-Nixey replied on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 13:11 GMT
Akinbo,

Questions are fine. All my answers are yes. I much enjoyed your essay and gave it a high mark a while ago.

Richard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 03:20 GMT
Richard,

I found your essay thought provoking and very much in keeping with the findings of a 12 year experiment I have recently completed. Your statement, "Our answer is that all outcomes are possible but that no outcome is inevitable in any one case." is indeed the case. You made so many great analogies that I will need to reread your essay again.

Anyway, I would like to ask you some questions via email and would like to know your email address or if you wish you can send me your response to my email address at: msm@physicsofdestiny.com

Thanks,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Richard William Kingsley-Nixey replied on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 12:15 GMT
Manuel,

Thank you. I did read and award your essay some good points some time ago now. I see you haven't doe the same for mine despite your words. I saw your point, though not any great significance, and recall I thought it unfinished somehow. You infer some conclusion without seeming to want to state it. What is it?

Richard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 21:56 GMT
Dear Richard,

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


Gene H Barbee wrote on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 12:16 GMT
Hi Richard,

Thanks for reading my essay and yes I read Peter Jackson's essay and yours. You are a good writer and it was fun. By the way, i believe the Planck scale is way too high. Read vixra:1307.0085.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Richard William Kingsley-Nixey wrote on Aug. 22, 2013 @ 13:22 GMT
Gene,

Glad you enjoyed it. I agree about the Planck scale. OK for 'matter' as we know it perhaps, but I think it's clear there's certainly more to life then that.

I also think your lens analysis etc. is far more important than most have recognised. That seems to to be shown by Peter Jackson's essay. I hope you keep pushing it.

Best wishes.

Richard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.