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

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 8/8/13 at 10:35am UTC, wrote Dear Margriet, I am posting this on your essay also, so that you can get...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/8/13 at 2:19am UTC, wrote Dear Margriet Anne O\'Regan, And if the eUniverse was a work of art ? The...

Chris Granger: on 8/8/13 at 1:46am UTC, wrote Margriet, I enjoyed reading your very unique essay! In the interest of...

basudeba mishra: on 8/8/13 at 1:25am UTC, wrote Dear Madam, Your essay touches upon many unexplored areas, which can be...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 21:34pm UTC, wrote Dear Margriet, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the...

Cristinel Stoica: on 8/7/13 at 7:35am UTC, wrote Hi, votes are vanishing again.

Margriet O'Regan: on 8/7/13 at 0:59am UTC, wrote Hi Edwin !! Thank you so much for your help & coaching !! In the closing...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/6/13 at 20:30pm UTC, wrote Dear Margriet Anne, We are at the end of this essay contest. In...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

George Musser: "Imagine you could feed the data of the world into a computer and have it..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "Personally Joe me I see like that ,imagine that this infinite eternal..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "Joe it is wonderful this,so you are going to have a nobel prize in..." in First Things First: The...

Robert McEachern: ""I'm not sure that the 'thing as it is' is irrelevant." It is not. It is..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "lol Zeeya it is well thought this algorythm selective when names are put in..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "is it just due to a problem when we utilise names of persons?" in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Georgina Woodward: "I suggested the turnstiles separate odd form even numbered tickets randomly..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...


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 17, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: INFORMATION AT LAST !! by Margriet Anne O'Regan [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Margriet Anne O'Regan wrote on Jul. 8, 2013 @ 17:30 GMT
Essay Abstract

I claim that 'information' is the sum total of geometric objects present here in our universe, & as particular entities are eminently observable they can be observed even as they are being used as the means with which we ourselves think - which observational exercise enables the ontological identities of all of the directly information-related phenomena such as thought, mind & consciousness to be well & properly established; further that this observational exercise allows for the establishment of matter's quintessential nature also.

Author Bio

I am an aging, amateur, Antipodean widow who is an avid & passionate searcher for truth; I have insatiable curiousity about everything. I have never written a paper - nor an essay - before & I am glad that the FQXi Community has provided this opportunity to persons such as myself. Thankyou !

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 01:48 GMT
Dear Margriet,

Welcome to FQXi and thanks for submitting your essay. Unlike those focused on entanglement, you've recognized that information implicitly includes a "role in all information related phenomena such as thought, mind, intelligence and consciousness." Moreover, you have intuited that the nature of (and experience of) subjectivity leads to a pan-psychic conception, as the idea...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Margriet O'Regan replied on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 02:19 GMT
Dear Edwin

Phew !! - Lot's of brow wiping here !!! All this is so new to me - not that I haven't actually spent a life time working up to the day when I could get 'my stuff' 'out there' !!! & once again I am so glad for this FQXi forum in which to do so.

And thank you for your supportive comments. I'm actually quite blown away by the fact that you - & others - seemed to understand...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Edwin Eugene Klingman replied on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 04:01 GMT
Hi Margriet,

I'm glad that our comments have reinforced your efforts. In my opinion you have intuited the basic issues. The fact that you identify an 'interstitial fluid' as significant is key. You think it is water, I think it is the local gravitational field induced by mass flow in the brain. We simply differ over specifics of the mechanism.

Your essay does not deserve to be in last place, so I will try to move you off of that spot. By the way, your placement is not totally a function of your essay. With over 180 essays to read, very few can read all of them, so it is important to 'market' your ideas by reading other essays and linking your ideas to their ideas, hoping they might be interested enough to look more closely at yours. It's not ideal, but it's the way the world works.

Thanks again for sharing your ideas. Your first attempt was excellent, and you chose the right forum.

Best wishes,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Margriet Anne O'Regan replied on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 00:59 GMT
Hi Edwin !! Thank you so much for your help & coaching !!

In the closing moments of this most auspicious event I feel driven to add the following remarks :-

Some of the positive-rate-worthy features of my essay are the following:

(1) I provide a clear & easily understood definition of information, which is that it is the full set of real, not abstract nor hypothetical,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Stephen James Anastasi wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 06:19 GMT
Thanks Margriet!

I found it to be a refreshing look at our world. You might find the idea of Causal Dynamical Triangulations to your liking, in that CDT supposes that the world is made up of triangles, governed by certain rules and produces a very respectable result that may one day replace other theories. I would warn that it contains some fearsome mathematical devices though, and it is hard to find an article or book on it that one might at all call approachable, in my opinion.

The question remains - where did all this geometric structure come from? For that you might find my essay interesting.

Best wishes

Stephen Anastasi.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Antony Ryan replied on Jul. 15, 2013 @ 05:09 GMT
Hi Stephen and Margriet,

Firstly Margriet, Congratulations on a refreshingly insightful essay. As Stephen points out CDT is of great interest but complex.

I formed a theory 6 years ago that is similar (I've since found), but much more simple.

It basically is a theory of everything that solves the three paradoxes of cosmogony.

As an offshoot for this contest a colleague suggested entering, by applying my theory to Black Holes.

Anyway best of luck both of you in the contest - Stephen I'll try to get back to your essay soon! Still a few to read. Here's my essay.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Margriet Anne O'Regan replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 09:49 GMT
I forgot to address 'Triangulations'. Actually they play a very important role in my schema – but not at all in the way that you might think. Furthermore my triangulations are real, indeed, are real-life phenomena.

In my understanding triangulations are the manner in which human infants & all higher – learning – organisms program their on-board thinking-machines (please note that what we have inside our heads - & bodies – is not just a computer but genuine, bona fide thinking contraption).

As I understand it, when a child – indeed, any 'higher' (learning) organism – comes into this world, to it our world is a booming, buzzing, thumping, flashing confusion, a chaos of sensations that hopefully include warmth & murmuring, tasty milk, pleasing odours, bowel & bladder relief, etc, etc.

‘Triangulating’ all of these sensations WITH ONE ANOTHER - & not by any other method – is the one & only manner in which the new born’s ‘blank slate’ literally gets written on - & which slate then becomes that owner’s blueprint for life.

When you sit down & conscientiously count all of the different modes of sensation – such as balance, & pain, & temperature monitoring, & wetness - & then there are all of the emotions (which are ‘just’ reports on autonomic states ‘fear/love/anger etc - all of which sensations will be plummeting through any ‘higher’ new born’s body & brain, there are probably something like at least 50. And now I'm recalling more - proprioceptors & intereoceptors - thirst & hunger, a body clock, feeling sick or well, breathing, coughing, sneezing – & all of the monitors monitoring each & every movement one makes - heavens there are probably more than 50 – a 100 ?! - categories of sensations which require ‘triangulating’ together all by way of getting things straight for every ‘higher’ (learning) new born.

So ‘my triangulations’ turn out to be ‘fifty-ations’ or ‘hundredations’ !!!!

Cheers - Margriet

Bookmark and Share


Antony Ryan replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 17:00 GMT
Dear Margriet,

What a very clever way to explain us! I like that you've utilised the Universe's natural geometry in such a clever way. The number could literally be applied right up into the thousands could it not, with perhaps evolution finding more pathways?

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Jul. 9, 2013 @ 20:51 GMT
Ms. O’Regan,

Your essay would have been a fine reading experience had you admitted to being a professional scientific journalist. I find the fact that this was your first entry into the FQXi.org competition truly exceptional.

I wish you the best of luck.

Joe

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 07:40 GMT
Dear Margriet

Especially interesting, perhaps only a concept that I really do not understand the meaning is : " geometric objects properly " Can you interpret this phrase specific and detailed than that ?

Wishing you always be success and happiness.

And to change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition along with demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 14:57 GMT
Hello Margriet,

Your Bio underestimates the intellectual content of your essay, perhaps you do so deliberately.

As to your proposals that geometric objects carry information on their back, I agree entirely. I believe as I also portray in my essay that the answer to David Deutsch "information's ontological identity" are geometric objects!!

But I suggest that this will have more to do with their positional property rather than their shape which you suggest.

Again, you talk of 'infinitely thin'. This is not zero. Euclid did not talk of lines having length and infinitely thin breadths, but zero breadth! Read my essay and let me know if you agree with Euclid. Rate me low, if you do!

Certainly, your essay is not an amateur essay and this is remarkable, if as you say you have never written a paper or essay before.

Best of luck.

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


M. V. Vasilyeva wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 16:18 GMT
Hello Margriet!

welcome to the contest and never mind the 1 you got off the bat. This year everyone suffered the same fate; do not take it personally (boys behaving badly).

Very few women are participating this year and I am sure to read them all. I enjoyed your essay, especially its upbeat tone and sunny analogies. It is clear you had fun writing it and it was fun to read.

I hope you will enjoy reading my essay 'The Play of Mind in Emptiness' and will share your impressions with me in my thread http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1869

-Marina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

M. V. Vasilyeva replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 03:56 GMT
Margriet,

I just saw your post in Kimmo's blog and was hoping to find you here, replying to all the messages you got. I wanted to tell you that I really appreciated your essay on the next day after I read it. At first it seemed limiting to me to narrow information solely to the shape or geometry of things, but then I realized that you meant it in purely physical science sense -- that's the trouble we face as amateurs in trying to express ourselves, inventing our own terms or presenting things in a fresh, unfamiliar way... people used to certain terminology not always understand us. At least not right away.

And so the next morning I thought how right you were in finding information's ontological identity in pure geometry of all things. Including space, I think. No? See, in my understanding, everything is ultimately made of the the 'space stuff', starting with space itself of course. And it is the dynamic structure of space -- or its dynamic geometry -- what underlies all of reality.

Good to see you're here, even though it's kinda late in the contest :)

-Marina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 22:52 GMT
Dear Margriet,

Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon. So you can produce matter from your thinking or from information description of that matter. . . . ?

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...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jul. 13, 2013 @ 17:31 GMT
Dear Margriet,

For a first timer that was excellent and very original. I must confess I did have a little trouble following some of the points, but I'm sure if you read my essay you'll find it much trickier! Even some PhD's struggle to understand it!, (but that may be as it's written in plainer English than they're used to, as yours). Do give it a go.

My favourite bit was;

"Intelligence' is 'using the available information in an existentially efficacious manner; intelligence increases as the kind & amount of available information increases & also as to the efficacy with which that information is utilised."

There seem to be a few in science who may do better following that methodology!

Congratulations, and very best wishes.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 10:17 GMT
Hello Margriet,

I see you are not a frequent blogger...

As the contest in Wheeler's honor draws to a close, leaving for the moment considerations of rating and prize money, and knowing we cannot all agree on whether 'it' comes from 'bit' or otherwise or even what 'it' and 'bit' mean, and as we may not be able to read all essays, though we should try, I pose the following 4 simple questions and will rate you accordingly before July 31 when I will be revisiting your blog.

"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


sridattadev kancharla wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 00:45 GMT
Dear All,

It is with utmost joy and love that I give you all the cosmological iSeries which spans the entire numerical spectrum from -infinity through 0 to +infinity and the simple principle underlying it is sum of any two consecutive numbers is the next number in the series. 0 is the base seed and i can be any seed between 0 and infinity.

iSeries always yields two sub semi...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


john stephan selye wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 15:05 GMT
Hello Margriet - I'm going to be re-reading your essay in the days to come. I see that you're a very expressive writer, and being a science writer myself, I think you'll be interested by my essay, too.

I look forward to hearing your views.

John.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


john stephan selye wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 22:05 GMT
Having read so many insightful essays, I am probably not the only one to find that my views have crystallized, and that I can now move forward with growing confidence. I cannot exactly say who in the course of the competition was most inspiring - probably it was the continuous back and forth between so many of us. In this case, we should all be grateful to each other.

If I may, I'd like to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Woodward wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 23:53 GMT
Dear Margriet,

just to let you know I have read your well written essay. Thank you for sharing your many interesting thoughts with us.

I have read elsewhere that one of the big challenges for modern physics is how to incorporate the mind. Your essay is dealing with some issues that are very relevant to that.

As you will have noticed there is a great diversity of entries to the competition and interpretations of the essay question. Do not be discouraged by your essay's ranking, it is having the chance to share ideas that is more important.

I have enjoyed reading your entry and informative reply to Edwin's post. Kind regards, Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michel Planat wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 10:01 GMT
Dear Margriet,

Your essay is incredibly deep, it is a pity that it was not discovered before

(I found your comment on Szangolies blog).

I will take the time to review it today and rate it highly. It seems that you are putting the geometry of points, lines, circles, spheres at the very bootom and this foundational view always was very successfull in science.

You should not be afraid of looking at my own essay where geometry is foundational as well but also needs groups (i.e. symmetries) and algebra.

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1789

Best regards,

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michel Planat wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 12:09 GMT
Dear Margriet,

Your credo is not exactly "Tt from bit" but "It from geometry"

You write

"I have discovered ‘information’s’ ontological identity which is :

‘The full set of geometric objects properly present here in our universe’",

then

"a little bit of water... specifically the seat of our own conscious knowingness.",

you cite Deutsch "Information starts as some kind of electrochemical signals in my brain", then

"Storing geometric objects ?"

Your view is not organized enough but I keep the best of it. Panpsychism was advocated by great thinkers

(in combination with panlogism), from Leiniz to Whitehead.

My essay also claims that geometry plays a leading role in quantum contexts. But there is an underlying machinery

(the child's drawings) at the origin of the geometries. They are three basic ingredients (the points O,1 and infty

on a sphere, or a torus, or a surface with more holes), there is a bipartite graph on such a

topology ... the singularities of an algebraic curve at 0,1 and _inty is what matters.

Thank you for your worthwhile effect.

Best regards,

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 13:30 GMT
Dear Margriet,

Contests FQXi - is primarily a new radical idea. "The trouble with physics" push ... You have a new radical idea. In your essay deep original analysis in the basic strategy of Descartes's method of doubt, given new ideas, new concepts, eidoses and conclusions.

I fully agree with the method of your research. It is based on the conceptual and figurative synthesis of Kant's ideas of Plato and the "Platonic Solids". Very euricability method and ideas! I totally agree with your conclusion.

Just one question: How should the physics go to physical picture of the world was as rich in meaning as the picture of the world lyricists?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3ho31QhjsY

Rating - "Nine happy." Read and vote, please, my ideas.

Best regards,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michel Planat wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 15:29 GMT
Dear Margriet,

Thank you for your detailed comments on my blog. I will comment more on your message this night. Now you still have one day to learn the FQXI dance of rates. Your appreciation is welcome.

Kind regards,

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ralph Waldo Walker III wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 18:52 GMT
Dear Margriet,

Thank you for commenting on my post. First, I want to commend you on your uplifting spirit and gracious comments! It is so refreshing to have such a genuine, enthusiastic person like you as part of this process of discovery.

I was also very glad that you offered your additional comments to your post, because it helped me better understand your views. I, too, had never before submitted any sort of writing or entered an essay contest in my life, and the angst I felt in doing so was great, so I want to congratulate you on having the courage to enter your essay and put forth your intriguing ideas.

I wish you the very best Margriet, and you are one of the entrants I will remember fondly, and always strive to emulate in terms of your kind attitude toward others, and your positive, uplifting spirit. I am very happy to give you a positive rating.

Sincerely,

Ralph

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 20:30 GMT
Dear Margriet Anne,

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


Cristinel Stoica wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 07:35 GMT
Hi, votes are vanishing again.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 21:34 GMT
Dear Margriet,

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


basudeba mishra wrote on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 01:25 GMT
Dear Madam,

Your essay touches upon many unexplored areas, which can be further developed. Here is our feedback that you may use in a constructive way.

We view geometrical properties as description of dimensional relationship of fixed form solids. Dimension is the perception of form that differentiates between the inner structural space and external relational space of any object....

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Chris Granger wrote on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 01:46 GMT
Margriet,

I enjoyed reading your very unique essay! In the interest of time and given my penchant for being substantive in posted analysis, I'll need to reserve comments for later, but I wanted to let you know that I did read and rate your essay and much appreciated your commentary regarding mine. I hope to read more of your interesting ideas and perspectives in the future!

Chris

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 02:19 GMT
Dear Margriet Anne O\'Regan,

And if the eUniverse was a work of art ?

The eUniverse conceiving the woman and the man, the flowers and the smiley faces, is a recognized Artist.

The evidence is there and will remain forever. The motion was obvious for Aristotle, also for Galileo, Newton and Einstein. What has changed is the understanding and interpretation.

For the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 10:35 GMT
Dear Margriet,

I am posting this on your essay also, so that you can get mail. I posted replies to your postings in my essay, please have a look.

Thank you for nice explanation.

Please tell me if there any difference in data in a computer and data (same)in a human mind or you can say in our thinking?

Can matter be created from that data?

Best

=snp

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.