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

Jeffrey Schmitz: on 4/21/15 at 23:53pm UTC, wrote Marcel, I do enjoy short essays. You read and commented on my essay, which...

Marcel-Marie LeBel: on 4/19/15 at 17:02pm UTC, wrote James, "Incidentally, hasn't the soliton wave model for light been used...

James Hoover: on 4/17/15 at 20:49pm UTC, wrote Marcel, "Science has to stop poking the black box and must start figuring...

Joe Fisher: on 4/10/15 at 14:48pm UTC, wrote Dear Marcel-Marie, I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity;...

Ted Erikson: on 4/9/15 at 14:32pm UTC, wrote FYI:My Essay 2408 error corrections @ Chicago Section AAPT Spring Meeting...

Armin Nikkhah Shirazi: on 4/5/15 at 20:11pm UTC, wrote Dear Marcel, I agree with you that the answer of why mathematics is to so...

Marcel-Marie LeBel: on 4/2/15 at 22:38pm UTC, wrote Vlad, Joe, I read your essays Good stuff! Edwin, printed and in reading....

Harry Ricker III: on 4/2/15 at 13:48pm UTC, wrote Dear Marcel, Your thesis is a tautology.


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Lorraine, Thanks for sharing,we speak about our main global..." in Till Next Time

Georgina Woodward: "Robert, re. your ""one huge mistake"- they are describing non-existent..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: "They are proud, because they have solved some problems, which are..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

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

Robert McEachern: "Eckard, I do have an interest in the history, but not as much as I used..." in First Things First: The...

Georgina Woodward: "The Schrodinger's cat thought experiment presents 3 causally linked state..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Roger Granet: "Well put! Physics is hard, but biochemistry (my area), other sciences..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

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


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 19, 2019

CATEGORY: Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015) [back]
TOPIC: Effectiveness of mathematics! An answer, not a question by Marcel-Marie LeBel by Marcel-Marie LeBel [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Mar. 13, 2015 @ 21:02 GMT
Essay Abstract

The effectiveness of mathematics in describing this universe comes from one fact and only one conclusion. The fact is that the foundation of mathematics is logic. The only conclusion is that the universe works by logic. This entails a universe that is operational on logic. In order to be operational on logic, this universe can only admit one substance or stuff and only one built-in cause, all following simple rules of logic. The rule of non-contradiction describes the only impossibility that allows for everything else to be possible. I am calling for a paradigm shift; for science to address the logical ontology of the universe.

Author Bio

Author Bio BSc Biology 1979, Three years in environment, 29 years in a forensic laboratory in counterfeits.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Mar. 15, 2015 @ 03:37 GMT
Sorry for the short text. I took notice of the contest only 3 days before the deadline...

So, all I could do was to give you the punchline. The universe is a truth system that follows rules of logic and with the consequence of allowing only one substance and one cause.

That single substance/process is time which happen to be the loophole in the rule of non-contradiction....

As said, details in the previous essays:

http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/LeBel_Metaph
ysics_Possibili.pdf

http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/LeBel_LeBel_FQXI_20
11_The_L.pdf

http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/LeBel_LeBel_FQXI201
3_Itfrom.pdf

p.s. I love it! Think Tank by crowd sourcing ... But, what's the contingency plan?

Good luck to you all.

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share



Jonathan Khanlian wrote on Mar. 15, 2015 @ 04:17 GMT
Hi Marcel,

I am not sure I understood everything in your brief essay, but I do agree that physics has a date with philosophy.

Please check out my Digital Physics movie essay if you get the chance.

Actually, Ed Fredkin, the guy who coined the term "Digital Physics" now prefers "Digital Philosophy"... maybe one day "physics" will be a misnomer for the name of the science that describes reality.

Thanks,

Jon

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Marcel-Marie LeBel replied on Mar. 15, 2015 @ 14:38 GMT
Jon,

"..maybe one day "physics" will be a misnomer for the name of the science that describes reality..."

We lost our purpose in the language. When someone says that something "is" , he commit himself to the ontological analysis of that thing, i.e. what it is by itself, not has we perceive it.

What "is" is for philosophy to discern. The substance belongs to metaphysics, and reality as experience belongs to physics. They are both necessary.

I will view your movie

Thanks,

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share



David Brown wrote on Mar. 15, 2015 @ 14:14 GMT
Dear Marcel-Marie LeBel,

In your essay "Effectiveness of mathematics! An answer, not a question", you wrote, "Every 100 years or so, the science of the day has an appointment with philosophy. Simple matter of stepping back and figuring out where we stand. Now, Science has to stop poking the black box and must start figuring out what’s in it. Use ontology and logic; add it to your mandate. That would be a paradigm shift! To me, that is what the effectiveness of mathematics is telling us to do." Wolfram in "A New Kind of Science" Chapter 9 suggested a new non-measurable concept of time — each Planck time interval is an approximation created by Wolfram's updating parameter within Wolfram's automaton operating on Fredkin-Wolfram information below the Planck scale. Wolfram also suggested that there are 4 or 5 simple rules that define his automaton. Google "witten milgrom" and "milgrom new paradigm". I say that the string theorists have underestimated Milgrom, McGaugh, Kroupa, and Pawlowski. Because the anti-MOND camp has vastly more funding than the pro-MOND camp, there has been very slow acceptance of MOND.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Mar. 16, 2015 @ 15:23 GMT
Dear Marcel,

I agree with you: "Every 100 years or so, the science of the day has an appointment with philosophy. Simple matter of stepping back and figuring out where we stand. Now, Science has to stop poking the black box and must start figuring out what's in it. Use ontology and logic; add it to your mandate. That would be a paradigm shift!"

It is necessary to dig deep into the ontology and dialectic logos and eidos, ontology and dialectics of Nature.

John Wheeler left physicists good covenant: "Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers". But how many people follow this covenant? What is needed is a synthesis of all knowledge accumulated by mankind. This problem is well formulated Edmund Husserl in "Origin of Geometry»: "Only to the extent, to which in case of idealization, the general content of spatio-temporal sphere is apodictically taken into account, which is invariant in all imaginable variations, ideal formation may arise, that will be clear in any future for all generations and in such form will be transferable by the tradition and reproducible in identical intersubjective sense ."

I believe that the scientific picture of the world should be the same rich senses of the "LifeWorld» (E.Husserl), as a picture of the world lyricists , poets and philosophers:

"We do not see the world in detail,

Everything is insignificant and fractional ...

Sadness takes me from all this."
( Alexander Vvedensky,1930)

It is by a mathematical point only that we are wise,

as the sailor or the fugitive slave keeps the polestar in his eye;

but that is sufficient guidance for all our life.

We may not arrive at our port within a calculable period,

but we would preserve the true course.


(Henry David Thoreau, 1854)

Kind regards,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Woodward wrote on Mar. 16, 2015 @ 19:18 GMT
Hi Marcel-Marie,

I sat down last night preparing myself for a long and controversial read but was surprised by the brevity of your entry this year. I have read your explanation and good on you for putting something together that will at least introduce new readers to your ideas.

All the best, Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dipak Kumar Bhunia wrote on Mar. 17, 2015 @ 05:54 GMT
Dear Marcel-Marie LeBel,

I think that makes little difference whether an essay is short or long, but what matters only its topic.

Is it "logic", that connects physics & mathematics in most fundamental level?

Best wishes

Dipak

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Mar. 17, 2015 @ 19:37 GMT
David,

Thanks for the Wolfram reference ... I will follow it.

Good luck,

Vladimir,

"Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers" It is only true because philosophers failed their discipline by trying to use the tools of science instead of the tools of their trade.

"What is needed is a synthesis of all knowledge accumulated by mankind."

You are right! But not before we realize what our reductionism has lead us to; a simple universe where logic is the name of the game.

Good luck

Dipak,

Logic is everywhere, transcends all truth systems and is scale independent.

Good luck

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share


Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 18, 2015 @ 09:55 GMT
Dear Marcel,

I invite you to see and appreciate my analysis of the philosophical foundations of mathematics and physics, the method of ontological constructing a new basis of knowledge and new unifying paradigm - the maternal generating structure, "La Structure mère" as the ontological framework, carcass and foundation of knowledge, the core of which - the ontological (structural, cosmic) memory.

Kind regards,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Mar. 31, 2015 @ 21:52 GMT
Dear Marcel,

I wish you had had more time to review your basic ideas. Your 2009 essay [the first five pages] provides the best argument I have ever read for the substantial unity of the world. Here is a link to your essay.

I also agree that 100 years is a meaningful period for re-conception. Quantum theory has (surprisingly) not changed much in the last century, despite the flood of new data that must be described in terms of old concepts. I believe this largely accounts for the confusion we face in 2015, where we don't even know whether a 'quantum state' is ontological or epistemological.

In my essay I focus on the 1925 concept of spin that Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck provided us and the 50-year-old concepts of non-locality that John Bell based on an oversimplified model of spin in a constant magnetic field. I invite you to read my essay and welcome your comments.

My best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sujatha Jagannathan wrote on Apr. 1, 2015 @ 11:35 GMT
Yes, you are logically, right.

Great work!

-Sincerely,

Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Apr. 2, 2015 @ 11:51 GMT
Hi Marcel,

Happy you could contribute something. Although, we may differ in the specifics, I find this statement profound and true:

"For a universe to be operational on logic, all of its constituent must be, although different in appearance, of the same nature because we can’t add apples and oranges. Better, it can only work using one cause. This is because no rule of simple...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Harry Hamlin Ricker III wrote on Apr. 2, 2015 @ 13:48 GMT
Dear Marcel, Your thesis is a tautology.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Apr. 2, 2015 @ 22:38 GMT
Vlad, Joe, I read your essays Good stuff!

Edwin, printed and in reading. Comments to come...

Harry, more like Total-logy :-). (talk to Miss. Sujatha JagannathanYou) may appear right for the part where there is creation of the universe from nothingness; The rule of non-contradiction already contains the time factor... But, it could be just some insulating substance , that in its most simple form, we have come to call "time". Remember, if it makes everything, chances are that we have a sense of it in some form, for which we have found the word "time". You will have to explain that part that is a tautology. Thanks for the comment...

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share



Armin Nikkhah Shirazi wrote on Apr. 5, 2015 @ 20:11 GMT
Dear Marcel,

I agree with you that the answer of why mathematics is to so effective is to be found in the foundations of mathematics, and in particular in logic, but I would go even further than you to claim that classical logic is not sufficient to model all aspects of reality and that when we talk of "logic" the term needs to refer to formal systems which are extensions of classical logic.

In my essay I outline how the ontological distinction between actuality and potentiality requires (at least) two extensions of classical logic, namely modal logic and free logic. Interestingly, both of these extensions of logic were developed not by mathematicians or physicists, but by philosphers, for purposes completely unrelated to what I am using them for. I don't quite get to the question of what the universe is made of or what causes it to evolve, but I think it does take me deeper than current approaches.

I agree with your last paragraph. About 4 years ago, I wrote an essay, "Ontology and the wave function collapse"

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/83153

which can be interpreted as a declaration of a new research program of which my current essay is the latest contribution, doing exactly what you suggest should be done: to use ontology and logic to elucidate some of the fundamental processes described by physics.

It appears we have a common vision.

Best wishes,

Armin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ted Erikson wrote on Apr. 9, 2015 @ 14:32 GMT
FYI:My Essay 2408 error corrections @

Chicago Section AAPT

Spring Meeting 2015 - Glenbrook South High School

April 11, 2015

8:15-8:45

Registration and Continental Breakfast

8:50-9:00

Welcome and Introductions - John Lewis - Host

9:00 -9:15

Dimensionless Dualities

Ted Erikson - R/E UnLtd. - sdog1@sbcglobal.net

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 10, 2015 @ 14:48 GMT
Dear Marcel-Marie,

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Apr. 17, 2015 @ 20:49 GMT
Marcel,

"Science has to stop poking the black box and must start figuring out what's in it"

Can we not observe the classical world like scientists have done with nature, the European robin, for example, and figure out how they navigate N and S with the seasons. Biologists and Physicists saw an integral connection with quantum mechanics in the new field of quantum biology. My essay http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2345. on connections of mind, math, and physics also looks into mapping DNA and simulating the BB, that is if the BB was real.

Incidentally, hasn't the soliton wave model for light been used in the slit experiment?

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Marcel-Marie LeBel replied on Apr. 19, 2015 @ 17:02 GMT
James,

"Incidentally, hasn't the soliton wave model for light been used in the slit experiment? " Possibly... Is this the one one photon at the time?

I will check your essay,

Thanks,

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share



Jeffrey Michael Schmitz wrote on Apr. 21, 2015 @ 23:53 GMT
Marcel,

I do enjoy short essays. You read and commented on my essay, which questions logic. Logic exists, but since logic is part of our thinking and language, we seem to have no way of stepping back and seeing what it is. The universe might be logic and order creating themselves from disorder, but I wish to understand the working of such a machine before I make that conclusion. Logic is not the correct tool to dissect itself.

Sincerely,

Jeff

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.