Edwin,

Thank you for your post. Forgive me, but for an analogy I will consider a computer application.

I tend to think of physical laws as a software application of which there are many. Fundamentally we are capable of reducing the hierarchy of an application into a lower Boolean logic of (1's and 0's) on or off. Somewhere in between we use a programming language and interpreter...

view entire post

Edwin,

Thank you for your post. Forgive me, but for an analogy I will consider a computer application.

I tend to think of physical laws as a software application of which there are many. Fundamentally we are capable of reducing the hierarchy of an application into a lower Boolean logic of (1's and 0's) on or off. Somewhere in between we use a programming language and interpreter that helps the computer initialize the application. This middle layer is the 'web of mathematics'/programming language used by nature. Nature represents the entire hierarchical structure. Our existence is, hypothetically speaking, on the upper application layer, a physicist may manipulate the program to build any application in an effort to render any specific event, the theorists binds the interpreter layer while the mathematician understands the basic code of logic at the physical layer. So yes, we may say 'the laws of nature are outside of physics', but that is only true because it is beyond our comprehension of a specified layer. Similarly we may observe strange phenomenon or failures that may arise within the upper application that have nothing to do with that programming layer (physics), but behind this programming layer, within the basic code, we find a conflict beyond our higher scope we must troubleshoot and investigate. Comprehensively the hierarchical system is structured on the dependency of other layers to facilitate reality as we observe it. This is almost similar to the concept of dimensional 'flat landers' if you will.

Nevertheless, we can not change the fundamental layer, we are only capable of modifying the upper layers of reality using our arrangement of physical laws/programming code. The programming hierarchy works bottom up. This means we are at some levels incapable of changing the basic fundamental laws upon which our reality operates.

Free will is limited. We must evoke a loop hole in the fundamental laws using the fundamental laws to create a desired outcome of free will. This is not free will, it is more an explicit negotiation of the physical laws at one layer constituted by a fundamental programming layer below. We are constantly compromising with these silly fundamental laws to exercise free will...so said the politician, banker, and attorney.

Every object occupies a particular spatial gauge. For ease of calculation, we shortcut this concept and assume every object observed as a point particle of mass which is very misleading. The mass and spatial ratios (volume) become important when we describe the bending of relative space-time in multiple trajectories. My definition of dimensions relates to a path in space or a direction in space relative to a designated superposition in space and it describes the object's shape (gauged volume without mass-think of a wire grid in animation). There are infinite dimensions in which an object may propagate (we may use only 3 and their relative relation to each other, but this method is a relative triangulation of dimensions in orthogonal perspectives -- it's also why I introduced infinities in relation to a hypothesized superposition zero- but both are abstracts and not absolute.)

Thank you for your inquiry and sorry for the long response, but you asked great questions...best wishes to you as well,

D.C.Adams

view post as summary

Dear Sir,

We thoroughly enjoyed your excellent essay.

Mathematics describes the quantitative aspect of Nature, whereas physics describes the other aspects – qualia. Thus, they are interrelated. Language is the transposition of information to another system’s CPU or mind by signals or sounds using energy (self communication is perception). The transposition may relate to a fixed...

view entire post

Dear Sir,

We thoroughly enjoyed your excellent essay.

Mathematics describes the quantitative aspect of Nature, whereas physics describes the other aspects – qualia. Thus, they are interrelated. Language is the transposition of information to another system’s CPU or mind by signals or sounds using energy (self communication is perception). The transposition may relate to a fixed object/information. It can be used in different domains and different contexts or require modifications in prescribed manner depending upon the context. Since mathematics follows these rules, it is also a language. Mathematics explains only how much one quantity, whether scalar or vector; accumulate or reduce linearly or non-linearly in interactions involving similar or partly similar quantities and not what, why, when, where, or with whom about the objects. These are subject matters of physics. The interactions are chemistry.

All our measuring instruments have limited capacity to measure: one aspect over time. Thus, we take readings in phases. The same is true for perception. Thus, we cannot have all knowledge. For this reason, we take readings over limited time and generalize it sometimes linking it with other aspects (which may not be complete and sometimes go against natural principles). This “pattern of presumptive logical sequences controlled by a probabilistic array of options derived from a shared algorithm” explains our interpretation of events. Love is just like charge interaction and intoxicates one individual to be attracted towards someone or something else. When we come across our object of love, consciously or unconsciously we recall some past event, the memory of which is pleasant. This intoxicates us and we equate the whole object or persona with our sweet memory to pursue that “happiness” or “preferred state”, though it is not true – it may have other unpleasant aspects, which would be revealed later. It does not follow logic.

We have discussed measurement, relativity, zero and infinity in detail from fundamental perspective in our essay.

Reality is whatever exists (has a limited structure that evolves in time and is perceptible), is intelligible (knowable) and communicable (describable using a language). Perception is the processing of the result of measurements of different but related fields of something with some stored data to convey a combined form “it is like that”, where “it” refers to an object (constituted of bits) and “that” refers to a concept signified by the object (self-contained representation). Measurement returns restricted information related to only one field at a time. To understand all aspects, we have to take multiple readings of all aspects. Hence in addition to encryption (language phrased in terms of algorithms executed on certain computing machines - sequence of symbols), compression (quantification and reduction of complexity - grammar) and data transmission (sound, signals), there is a necessity of mixing information (mass of text, volume of intermediate data, time over which such process will be executed) related to different aspects (readings generated from different fields), with a common code (data structure - strings) to bring it to a format “it is like that”.

Look at the structure of any equation. The initial condition or parameters are represented by the left hand side. The equality (or inequality) sign describes the special conditions to be met to start any interaction: be it the mathematics for dynamical systems to navigate through the Inter Planetary Super-highways (IPS) at macro level or the transition states in chemical reactions at micro level. Given the initial conditions, the right hand side describes the theorized outcome of the interaction. We may vary the parameters of the left hand side. That is our freewill (though our choices or degrees of freedom may be limited). Once the initial parameters are set, the right hand side - final outcome - will vary correspondingly as long as the equality sign holds. It is predetermined; otherwise there will be no theory. The equality sign - the special conditions – like temperature threshold to start a chemical reaction, are also predetermined.

Regards,

basudeba

view post as summary

Alex,



Mathematics is simply a model (tool) used to illustrate occurrences found in nature. This is no different than a painter painting an observed image or a musician scoring sheet music in an attempt to illustrate sound. Through the theory of music we are able to manipulate random notes (frequencies) to depict and communicate reality or imagination. Physics is similar but in...

view entire post

Alex,



Mathematics is simply a model (tool) used to illustrate occurrences found in nature. This is no different than a painter painting an observed image or a musician scoring sheet music in an attempt to illustrate sound. Through the theory of music we are able to manipulate random notes (frequencies) to depict and communicate reality or imagination. Physics is similar but in this discipline, the theory attempts to isolate the depicted truthful realities regarding nature. We are currently maturing these ideas to form a conclusive model. Until we satisfy our understandings of their individual incompleteness - all of our theories should be considered a speculative philosophy regarding the application of mathematics in its depiction of nature. Which is why I titled the essay “Physics the Philosophy of Mathematics”.

I used the infinity equation deliberately as a method to stir debates regarding how we see abstract numbers in mathematics (the proof of ‘interpreted’ axioms) which may differ from how we describe them in physics (constant numerical values). Until we resolve a better understanding of both we are left to philosophizing the truths about nature and its cohesive bond to mathematics and physics.

(Hint: Infinity and Zero are not numbers they are functions so they do not obey certain mathematical assumptions. What about the other numbers in between? Should we regard them as numbers or functions? It depends on our definition and context of the numbers used which require interpretation, definition, and perspective.).

Kudos - Very keen observation!

Best Regards,

D.C. Adams

view post as summary