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

Domenico Oricchio: on 5/27/14 at 8:25am UTC, wrote I voted on the same day your essay (I rated only the better essays some...

James Hoover: on 5/26/14 at 22:33pm UTC, wrote Domenico, Time grows short, so I am revisited those I've read to assure...

Domenico Oricchio: on 5/26/14 at 15:29pm UTC, wrote I read, today, of a micrometrical fractal structure that is a polymer...

Domenico Oricchio: on 5/26/14 at 9:39am UTC, wrote Thank you Aaron for reading my essay. I know that it is not possible to...

Aaron Feeney: on 5/26/14 at 5:23am UTC, wrote Hi Domenico, Thanks for visiting my page a while back, and for leaving...

Michael muteru: on 5/16/14 at 11:09am UTC, wrote Dear Domenico I have really enjoyed reading your work.quite alot you put...

James Hoover: on 5/14/14 at 6:38am UTC, wrote Domenico, Genius can be found in strange places, in dusty old rooms of a...

Domenico Oricchio: on 5/11/14 at 10:12am UTC, wrote Thank you for reading my essay, as always it is difficult to read all the...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Eckard,you seems persuaded by your Words and thoughts.I don t understand..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "In Darwinism/Weismannism there is no first cause, just a causal chain...." in First Things First: The...

Steve Agnew: "There are some questions that do not seem to have answers in the classical..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Agnew: "Yes, there are two very different narratives. The classical narrative works..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "lol no indeed it is not a lot,like I said I liked your general ideas.I have..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Steve Agnew: "There are three assumptions...is that a lot? The aether particle mass, the..." in The Demon in the Machine...


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 14, 2019

CATEGORY: How Should Humanity Steer the Future? Essay Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: A Hidden Diary by Domenico Oricchio [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Domenico Oricchio wrote on Feb. 11, 2014 @ 15:34 GMT
Essay Abstract

A smart world using genetic evolution

Author Bio

graduation: mechanical engineering degree: physics thesis: deterministic neural network and fuzzy neural netwoek master: advanced technology in communication and information research: -Genova,fractal dimensionality and experimental discrete equation -Marina di Ravenna, fluid dynamic and bacteria grow equation -Vietri sul mare, fluido dynamic model applied to soil pollution and associate bioremediation -Manchester (interrupted), Natural Gradient Descent and Indipendent Component Analysis

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Feb. 12, 2014 @ 23:41 GMT
Dear Dominico

Well done.

What a great castle and an amazing manuscript you found. What you assumed was natural deterioration such as woodworms, dry rot etc. was actually the work of a THING - a blob of invisible intelligence that systematically deleted the parts of the MS it did not like. Did it delete the mad scientist as well!?

Be very very wary when you tread those dusty floorboards again. And what if that nano techno blob escapes to whatever part of fair Italia the castle is found?

One question: Are the new materials made of actual DNA or could the base-pairs be any other molecule that does the same encoding job?

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Domenico Oricchio replied on Feb. 13, 2014 @ 01:10 GMT
Thank you, Vladimir.

The crazy old scientist, in other previous notes, include any chemical element of matter in the coding of the molecular structure (unambiguously like in the program Avogrado).

I am thinking that there is not much difference between the source of a program for molecular molecular editor, and a sequence of a DNA: both are the spatial representation of a molecule.

But, who can understand the crazy old man?

I have to pay attention to the danger, but in the morning it is safe!

Bookmark and Share



Author Domenico Oricchio wrote on Feb. 27, 2014 @ 11:32 GMT
I have been interested, in these hours, to the concept of beauty.

I came to the conclusion that the beauty is the smile of a woman, the primeval women, that is a promise, and absence of problems: if this is true the Mona Lisa of Leonardo da Vinci is the ideal of beauty for this reason, and Leonardo comprises this so he taken so long time to realize the smile.

I am interested to the concept, because there is beauty in a mathematical formula: if a person understand a formula, then from an image there is a promise of no problem, a simpler life, an understanding of the Nature.

The same is true for a image of butterfly, or Pollock painting, there are regularities that we see and understand (all is simple, without problem or danger): if the happiness is contemplate the beauty, then we must be source of beauty, we have to make others smile (... not laugh).

Bookmark and Share



Author Domenico Oricchio wrote on Mar. 4, 2014 @ 10:35 GMT
I am thinking an example that is - for me - a not optimal use of the technology.

There is an article in scientific american

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/iron-man-l
ike-exosuit-to-expand-ocean-exploration-video/

of a exosuit to diving unti 300 meters.

I have only a problem: two cameras, two microphones, two mechanical arms and feet, with a virtual software to connection with the surface, and electronic circuits immersed in the water can give the same results (with safe environment) with no depth and no time limit (if there is an energy transmission with a cable, and more persons alternating in the remote control of the suit).

All can work in a simple way if the human body movement can be transformed in a robot movement, so that the robot hands can manipulate like real hands.

There are not limit because immersed circuits, and immersed artificial muscles, have not problem with the pressure, for example the Marianna Trench can be explored for months - without interruptions - with an humanoid robot, that can make human action (I am thinking something like Atlas humanoid robot of Boston Dynamic).

Bookmark and Share



Ryoji Furui wrote on Apr. 20, 2014 @ 15:21 GMT
Dear Domenico,

interested in reading your essay especially at the section "... other lines destroyed ...". It is closer to my essay theme. my challenge is to bring nano technology to nuclear fusion. please read mine at

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1995

thank you

ryoji

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Woodward wrote on Apr. 21, 2014 @ 01:24 GMT
Hi Domenico,

really like the presentation of your essay. Also its optimism that we will evolve beyond selfish genotypes. I have concerns about nanotechnology, can it be controlled? I wonder sometimes whether for example microfibers could irritate airways and become the 'new asbestos' and what other damage nano-particles might do to the human body if ingested or rubbed into the eyes. Smart materials are an interesting development. I have mentioned self healing concrete and polymeric substances in my essay which give the appearance of response to an injurious stimuli but it isn't intelligent response. You envision I think intelligent nano-complex material that perhaps can respond to physical demands much as an organism might. Fascinating food for thought. Good luck, Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Apr. 22, 2014 @ 02:25 GMT
Dear Oricchio

It's nice! interesting and attractive but also very specific.

I also have the same point of view: to use Nature as a standard template for action.

10 points is slightly less for this essay.

Best wishes - Hải.CaoHoàng

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Tihamer T. Toth-Fejel wrote on Apr. 30, 2014 @ 03:24 GMT
Dear Dominico,

Your essay had a nice poetic presentation of many tantalizingly interesting ideas, and I appreciate the risk you took in choosing that avenue. However, I don't think that poetic imagery is the best way to steer humanity, mostly because it can be misinterpreted.

You wrote:

"How you include in genetic, and the brain, of a person the concept of good and evil? As a human race we are able to develop ethical behavior because the oppression of other individuals (the absence of sociality) led to the extinction of individuals that are not suitable for socializing."

There is no question that deciding good and evil is critical in knowing which direction to steer humanity. It seems that you're saying that evolution made us ethical. Looking around at the state of the world today (crime, suicide, injustice and violence everywhere, war), I'd say that evolution has done a very bad job of it. How do you propose to fix this? It doesn't appear that more genetic algorithms will do the job.

You also wrote: "millions of years of evolution has led to nearly perfect chemical structures capable of absorbing light, unreachable power to build muscles,"

Any hydraulic system is *much* more powerful (per kg. or any other metric) than human or animal muscles. Photosynthesis does not capture the entire spectrum, so we can say with certainty that it is not perfect; given other issues, it is only 3-6% efficient. We can build multi-layer photovoltaic systems that are more efficient than that now; we just can't do it as cheaply as growing crabgrass. Yet. :-)

While parallel experiments are great for using genetic algorithms to search solution spaces (which is why Mother Nature did it that way), human understanding and gestalt reasoning gets us to places that Mother Nature can never reach (e.g. macro-sized wheels, interstellar aircraft, lasers, electronics, etc.)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Judy Nabb wrote on May. 5, 2014 @ 07:53 GMT
Dominico,

A very different view of my own subject. I liked your interesting way of getting many different concepts into the text at high density without the need for syntax links. I agree the importance of genetic evolution, and evolution of our own intelligence over AI.

But do you suggest our future will steer itself as our past has? I fear we may be headed for to much medical/biological interference in physical form when ignoring the better methods of thought we need. Science is crucial in steering our future but can be abused. Do give any views on eugenics on my essay.

Judy

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on May. 10, 2014 @ 15:48 GMT
Dominico,

Great to read another highly original approach to the topic with a clever device to tie together a number of relevant subjects and ideas.

Are you really confident our natural evolution will be adequate to advance science at the pace we need for survival. I find our understanding of nature seems to be lagging behind what may be the required pace, even in a rut, as our intellectual evolution is slow.

My own essay has a similar abstract narrative which I hope you'll enjoy, as a tool for making a classical derivation of QM understandable. Do let me know if it works for you.

Well done for your great castle, commanding an impregnable position high in my esteem.

Best of luck

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Domenico Oricchio wrote on May. 11, 2014 @ 10:12 GMT
Thank you for reading my essay, as always it is difficult to read all the essays, and the old age begin to take me its toll.

I am glad that you like my essay, I don't write for the contest but only for the readers.

I read your essay, and the same thing happen to me, only that “Alice” is not light years away, but it is as it were: sometimes the technology can do nothing.

It is a different fictional approach to Bell's theorem, and it is interesting.

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 14, 2014 @ 06:38 GMT
Domenico,

Genius can be found in strange places, in dusty old rooms of a castle. I like your clever metaphors of discovery: nature writing patches, correction fluid, to describe intelligent interaction with the environment,the use of genetics, and AI.

All are needed for better approaches to a viable future. I express some of the same ideas with less metaphorical references.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

James Lee Hoover replied on May. 26, 2014 @ 22:33 GMT
Domenico,

Time grows short, so I am revisited those I've read to assure I've rated them. I find that I rated yours on 5/14. Hope you enjoyed mine.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Domenico Oricchio replied on May. 27, 2014 @ 08:25 GMT
I voted on the same day your essay (I rated only the better essays some weeks ago); but the important thing is the exchange of ideas, the reading, improve a little our awareness, and the reading does not worsen the reader never.

Bookmark and Share



Michael muteru wrote on May. 16, 2014 @ 11:09 GMT
Dear Domenico

I have really enjoyed reading your work.quite alot you put in prose.lets decode and actualize it.Very imaginative,give you 6/10.just voted.hope you find time to read/rate my essay - http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2101 -titled LIVING IN THE SHADOWS OF THE SUN: REALITIES, PERILS ESCAPADES MAN, PLANET AND KARDASHEV SCALE.MAKING THE GREAT TRANSITION by Michael muteru

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Aaron M. Feeney wrote on May. 26, 2014 @ 05:23 GMT
Hi Domenico,

Thanks for visiting my page a while back, and for leaving comments there. I found your essay to be a refreshing change of pace. I love the literary device of using the worms to allow for shifts in ideas from one intact paragraph to another. I got the message that we should learn more from nature to improve our own technology. I have rated it with these considerations in mind. Best wishes to you.

Warmly,

Aaron

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Domenico Oricchio replied on May. 26, 2014 @ 09:39 GMT
Thank you Aaron for reading my essay.

I know that it is not possible to read all, and that we have many interests and intellectual pursuits to follow all, so that each reading is a victory.

I don't write for the contest, only for the readers, so that I am happy for the reading, but the vote for my essay is not necessary.

Bookmark and Share



Author Domenico Oricchio wrote on May. 26, 2014 @ 15:29 GMT
I read, today, of a micrometrical fractal structure that is a polymer scaffold (but I think that it is possible each molecule with a different technology); it is an engineering work, that can be optimized with finite element method, to obtain the optimal function with the minimum use of the material:

http://phys.org/news/2014-05-three-step-fractal-nan
ostructures.html

each moving part can reduce the kinetic energy consumption.

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.