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 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

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

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 Fnd.

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


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

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

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

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
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


Thomas Ray: "(reposted in correct thread) Lorraine, Nah. That's nothing like my view...." in 2015 in Review: New...

Lorraine Ford: "Clearly “law-of-nature” relationships and associated numbers represent..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Information Channel. An example from Jon Barwise. At the workshop..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Please clarify. I just tried to put a simple model of an observer in the..." in Alternative Models of...

Lee Bloomquist: "Footnote...for the above post, the one with the equation existence =..." in Alternative Models of...

Thomas Ray: "In fact, symmetry is the most pervasive physical principle that exists. ..." in “Spookiness”...

Thomas Ray: "It's easy to get wound around the axle with black hole thermodynamics,..." in “Spookiness”...

Joe Fisher: "It seems to have escaped Wolpert’s somewhat limited attention that no two..." in Inferring the Limits on...

click titles to read articles

The Complexity Conundrum
Resolving the black hole firewall paradox—by calculating what a real astronaut would compute at the black hole's edge.

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

January 23, 2018

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Mathematical laws, a necessity but not sufficient by Rajiv K Singh [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Rajiv K Singh wrote on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 19:55 GMT
Essay Abstract

The laws of physics model the workings of natural phenomena so nearly comprehensively that the physicists have begun to articulate thoughts in terms of 'Theory of Everything'. Yet, there are certain phenomena, in particular, in the domain of our subjective abilities that make those thoughts possible, and our abilities to have purposeful aims and intentions, remain outside the scientific discourse. It is clear then that in the development of modern scientific thinking, certain properties and perspectives of natural function have remained ignored or unexplored. On the other hand, we may ask, does information have an existential reality? Could it exist without having a physical substratum, such as electronic register holding a bit of information, quantum states holding a qubit of information, and neurons representing the whole gamut of semantics of information? If information is not naturally associated with physical substratum, then could it ever emerge by any mechanism? The answer appears to be in the negative. In this article, it is especially worked out, how information is naturally associated with each state description of physical entities, and how natural information processing takes place at each physical interaction. It is further shown, how a self organizing system may evolve by natural processes such that elements of our thoughts and purposeful goals may emerge.

Author Bio

Gained Ph.D (1991) in (Astro)Physics from Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR). Worked on two major experiments, one, on-board NASA's space shuttle to study certain characteristics of cosmic rays, and another, on Giant Meterwave Radio Telescope (GMRT) in India. When my interest shifted to understanding how a brain functions, and how 'mental' abilities arise form neural, logical, and computational points of views, I left TIFR to devote full-time. While working privately, I have constructed a theoretical framework of natural information processing, form established empirical studies, and created a simulation to demonstrate the same.

Download Essay PDF File

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 06:50 GMT
hi rajiv,

it would appear that your essay illustrates a formal mathemtical means by which epistemology may be defined and explored, which is great have you encountered demster-shafer (a generalisation of bayes theorem) before?



report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh wrote on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 11:31 GMT
Dear Luke,

Thanks for your comment, and pointing me to Dempster-Shafer theory.

After you mentioned, I did look up dempster-shafer theory. But, what I describe does not relate with any kind of probability theories. No attempt is made to derive any statistical information. In fact, the attempt is directly the opposite, what information could a state of matter naturally correlate with...

view entire post

sridattadev kancharla wrote on Mar. 5, 2017 @ 20:50 GMT
Dear Rajiv,

Universe is an i-Sphere and we humans are capable of interpreting it as 4 dimensional dual torus inside a 3-Sphere, which consists of Riemann 2-sphere as Soul as depicted in S=BM^2 diagram in the attached doc. Soul is the simplest of the complex manifolds with in the 3-sphere, Mind and Body constitute the remaining complexity. Soul, Mind and Body are in a toroidal flux in human...

view entire post

attachments: 7_zero__i__infinity.docx

report post as inappropriate

basudeba mishra wrote on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 02:39 GMT
Dear Sir,

In the world of increasing fictionalization of physics, your paper stands apart by its logical consistency. You have rightly observed that “An information always conveys a relation, at least with contextual elements”. We call all objects “padaartha”, for the same reason: a pada – speech form hinting at information about a specific concept and artha – the object having...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 11:17 GMT
Dear Basudeba,

First thank you for perusing the essay and commenting. I am not well versed with the perspective that you offer, in particular the ancient knowledge, but after you mentioned, I read a bit about such schools of thoughts.

> “If an interaction among physical entities results in an observable state S of a physical entity P, then S of P must reciprocally relate (or...

view entire post

Joe Fisher replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 16:58 GMT
Dear Dr. Rajiv K Singh,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.


view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh replied on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 05:35 GMT
Dear Surreal Lord Joe Fisher,

Please excuse me for having all intentions to issue a disparaging remark about no part of your essay.

I incorrectly 'wish to implicate', “Things could be as complex as humans, and only a limited mathematical nature has the ability to create complexity even greater, and endow it with an universal language of expression.", to Lord Joe Fisher, still...

view entire post

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 20:26 GMT
Nice essay Dr Rajiv K Singh,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent on neural networks. I don’t know much about them, I learned a lot today, very good.

Your words in the appendix ….. “If the description of Nature, as defined by classical physics, and as supported by mathematical expressions with analog functions were to be true and exact, then the states could be described with...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Mar. 16, 2017 @ 01:50 GMT
Dear Rajiv K Singh,

Thanks for an interesting essay, and for your response to my essay.

You begin by saying "information must have reality of its own, otherwise it cannot be created."

Many today speak of information as if it were a type of particle. I do not believe this. Energy flows between systems, and if the energy causes a structural change (ink on paper, electronic...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh replied on Mar. 16, 2017 @ 06:20 GMT
Dear Edwin,

Thank you very very much for perusing my essay, and offering your views on it. Thank you again for striking on one of the most important contentions of mine that 'information must have a reality of its own'. Yes indeed, I too do not mean it to be something like a particle. I do take it though, as an associated property with a physical entity, almost like charge or mass, but...

view entire post

basudeba mishra wrote on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 03:21 GMT
Dear Sir,

We have replied to your comments in our thread. It will surely surprise you.



report post as inappropriate

Jeffrey Michael Schmitz wrote on Mar. 21, 2017 @ 21:54 GMT
All thoughts and information could be mapped in some “idea” space. This mapping is similar to Hilbert space in quantum mechanics, where each physical property is a ray in complex space. The details of this “idea” space (course code?) are not given, so this could be complex space or something different. This is a time-independent system “the terms ‘causal’ and ‘causality’, as used here, bear no presumption of temporal order.” Effects do not occur before causes, so somehow this temporal relationship must be set-up outside of this “idea” space. Once a proper matrix of information is set up then a solution is some best-fit vector in this space. Learning would be a better-fit vector (unless the attempted vector somehow changes the matrix “learning” would seem to be impossible). Yes, I can see this as a model for bacterium living in certain zone between “attractors” and “repulsion” and this could also be a model for a neural net. We should not assume that this is a model for all possible state just because it includes the simplest and the most complex.

I think this might be a good model for emotions. First, there is a valid evolutionary need for emotions. Anger, sadness, fear, happiness and other emotion change the behavior of an animal in (mostly) useful ways to help conform to conditions. Sad because of a lack of food will slow an animal down to conserve resources, as an example. Emotional state is due to a complex mixture of many factors.

I must note that this essay is not an easy read. The author’s wish to start general and stay general with few examples does not help the reader. Figure 3 with actual size and angular size made me confused until realized the relation to Hilbert space. I read this essay a number of times and I am sure I am still not clear about a number of ideas presented here.

Hope you do well in the contest,


report post as inappropriate

Jeffrey Michael Schmitz replied on Mar. 21, 2017 @ 21:56 GMT
I am Jeff not "Jef".

report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh replied on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 02:52 GMT
Dear Jeff,

Many writers here have taken a position that complete description of nature is not entirely derivable from mathematics alone. Mine happens to be one of them. In contrast to other essays that base their arguments on emergence of novel properties without having to derive how emergence actually takes place, my essay goes beyond that to actually show the steps. I am sorry that things...

view entire post

Anonymous wrote on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 05:21 GMT

I have not yet ranked your essay. None of what I said was from my essay, I was trying to restate your essay in my own words. I am not trying to judge your essay, just understand it.

Some essays are for a general readership and others are not. Your essay (we can both agree) is not for a general readership.

Quantum physics never violates causality.

In figure 3, what does angular size mean? I thought this was some angle in some "idea" space. You talk about p and not p being similar to being at right angles. Can physical entities be at less (or greater) than right angles to each others? Is this that angular size?

In nature, understanding the relationship between cause and effect is very important. How would you relate cause to effect in your system?

You talk about oxidation and fermentation for two different types of bacteria. Can you show a case where one type of bacteria makes a choice between two different pathways?

Sorry for the misunderstanding,


report post as inappropriate

Anonymous wrote on Mar. 22, 2017 @ 06:40 GMT
Dear Jeff,

Thanks for clarifying, I appreciate that (your comment and rating happened around the same time). By all means, you must raise doubts, and it is my job to attempt to satisfy, or in due course may fail.

I see that you have put forward a notion of 'idea space' that you assert maps onto Hilbert Space. But I attempt to present a case that information is naturally associated...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Cristinel Stoica wrote on Mar. 29, 2017 @ 17:56 GMT
Dear Rajiv,

Very interesting essay, I finally got to read it. I loved this "an information is necessarily semantic in our consideration", which indeed is true. Information is always relative to something, but if all that is is information, one should stop somewhere, and that place should be the source of the meaning. You said it well that "Natural association of information with states of physical entities and the mechanics of information processing at each physical interaction are the critical missing elements in our scientific understanding that are needed to bridge the fissure between the tangible material and intangible purposes!". Also I liked the idea of conjunctions of disjunctions.

Best regards,


report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh wrote on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 03:43 GMT
Dear Cristi,

First, thank you very very much for perusing and commenting on my essay.

It is downright satisfying to observe that someone like you who can analyze and critique my essay well has liked a few things in my essay. Though, I would have further liked a statement on whether in your view the method of information processing described here is indeed potent enough to form the basis of semantic build up by natural processes? And whether neural system indeed appears to have used this method of information processing?

If I understand your statement, "... but if all that is information [as a description of relation], one should stop somewhere, and that place should be the source of the meaning", correctly, then it seems to be pointing to some ultimate and absolute reality that is independent of relative nature of all descriptions. When I think of this relative nature of all descriptions, I conclude that at the most fundamental level, elements are not absolute in the sense of having an existence independent of everything else, independent of any a reference frame. In fact, at most fundamental level, elements are not needed to be stable, as long as there exists a constancy of relation among such elements, even if limited to some extent.

Thanks again.


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 16:57 GMT
Greetings Rajiv,

After reading your timely and welcome thoughts on the flavor of this year's contest, I will most certainly return back with comments after reading your essay. Agree or disagree; I am sure it is worthy of my attention.

All the Best,


report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh replied on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 17:45 GMT
Dear Jonathan,

I would appreciate your perusal of my essay. And be in the knowledge that I do not need any sweetener, so feel free to analyze and dissect as plainly as you could.

In the mean time, let me also have a look at your essay, given the fact that your main profession for living is not physics or maths, yet you follow them both so earnestly. Moreover, I rarely encounter an artist's view on such matters.


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 04:24 GMT
You have done well Rajiv..

I like that you describe 'an information' as conveying a relation, and having a reality of its own, including all categories from the most abstract to the most definite. The use of 'atomic' in describing the orderly progression of numbers is confusing. But overall your terminology is refreshingly clear. The concept of conjunction and disjunction does have parallels with the topic in my essay, non-associative algebras and geometry. In the octonions, my main example; the algebra fails to be associative, but is alternative - which means alternating associative and anti-associative elements.

I'm guessing you already read my essay. In my conversation with Tevian at GR21; I was mainly concerned with how certain geometric elements break down between the quantum gravity scale and the Planck scale. What defines geometry is relational information, like independent objects that can be separated and move differently from each other, so the concepts from General Relativity only hold down to about 10^-12 cm. But I am arguing that evolutive properties in Math have a broader footprint than the nanoscale realm alone.

However it's nice to see that some of my ideas about the mechanics of emergence can arise in a much simpler context or rules base. And this is what you have shown. I like how you wove in constancy and semantic correlation. I do not like that you made me wonder if you were going to connect it back to the assigned topic, as you finally did at the end. Of course; showing the mechanics of sentience emergence is a big deal, and does address the topic, but that has to be inferred. So I can't give you full credit, but I do give you high marks and kudos.

All the Best,


report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 04:38 GMT
The syntax of the octonions is notable..

I have the following comments. It ranges from most abstract to most specific. It starts and ends with an identity declaration. It alternates involutive and evolutive terms. It forms a seven level hierarchy of abstractions. I've written out several dozen, but my favorite goes like this...

One, open, as multiplicity and formless nothingness, finds peace in true relation, and knows all as self.

This can be put in a list-like format instead.

Oneness, openness, as-ifness, multiplicity, ...

Identity, receptive, projective, multiple, ...

This would appear to be a variation on, or an extension of, your theme of alternating conjunctive and disjunctive elements to form a valid decision making protocol.

More later,


report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 16:31 GMT
You may find value in the attached paper..

Paola Zizzi is one of my inspirations, so I hope you enjoy this too. It is not an exact match for what you are doing, but it addresses some similar concerns, so it may be useful or helpful.



attachments: zizzi_paper.pdf

report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 16:33 GMT
Oh the paper above is called..

"Poetry of a Logical Truth"



report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 22:05 GMT
Copied from my thread:

Thanks anyway Rajiv!

In a way, you have paid me a compliment and shown me I am at a crossroads. I felt the same, the first time I read Alain Connes' paper "Noncommutative Geometry Year 2000" I would get a few pages in, get overloaded, then come back again another day until I could get a little further each time. Much of it seemed utterly incomprehensible, but I eventually grasped a few key concepts - due to sheer repetition. Later I learned that Connes advised budding mathematicians to do exactly that, adding that when his own brain became full he would recline for a while and nap or lay in reverie while letting the new ideas sink in.

I am presenting an idea that is foreign to almost everyone literate in Math, which goes against the grain of some of what we are taught early on, and that only a handful of mathematicians are masterful about. The fact that I see it as a key is only that I have focused so intently on certain points of interest for years. No worries!

All the Best,


report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Apr. 1, 2017 @ 19:43 GMT
I would like to add..

Your comments illustrate why endnotes are allowed and sometimes needed. I said upon finishing the body text "why bother since it won't count anyway?" but I now see that I owe someone like you a bridge between the ordinary approach and what I am championing. My view is that the portion of Math most people learn covers only what is regular, and this is a small part of the total landscape. However; you did not have the benefit of conversations with the world's foremost experts on irregular Math, Ben Mandelbrot, 30 years ago - to spur you into seeking out some of the more arcane subjects in Math. Nor have most of my readers.

I am glad you pulled no punches, and honestly informed me of my deficiency. Thanks again for your honest sharing of thoughts.

All the Best,


report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh replied on Apr. 2, 2017 @ 04:29 GMT
Hi Jonathan,

Readers do not care if forced reduction of the text of your idea is the reason something is not clear. They begin to believe that the author is resorting to leaps in his/her logic, that is, the rationality is not well founded. Therefore, one has no choice but to cut down on the themes to be presented. At the same time, no reader has the patience to read properly even 25,000 chars (so called 9 pages). Therefore, a two step evaluation process is better. In the first step, one writes a smaller version of 15000 chars (5-paqges), and the selected ones are asked to resubmit with liberal limits.


Alexey/Lev Burov wrote on Apr. 1, 2017 @ 01:28 GMT
Dear Rajiv,

Your essay has several interesting points, which I’d like to stress and follow up with some questions. It would be more convenient to start from your comment to our essay:

“You ask, "If the two branches of being [thought and matter] were totally alien to each other, how could they interact? If they have a common ground, how can that ground be understood?". What if...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Author Rajiv K Singh wrote on Apr. 2, 2017 @ 06:20 GMT
Dear Alexey and Lev,

First let me thank you for perusing my essay, but I do hope you did peruse! Thanks are due for pointing me to "Achilles paradox, and Feyman's conclusion", I will hunt down and use appropriately.

I am writing this to contest the comments, assuming that the responders are willing to take the time, and effort to move forward in our understanding.

"You are...

view entire post

Alexey/Lev Burov replied on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 03:53 GMT
Dear Rajiv,

Time is running fast and I feel that most likely I will not find a possibility for a proper pondering and responding on your last post before April 7th. It was a pleasure to discuss all the issues with you, and regretfully many things are left underdiscussed. Please excuse us for that. Our score, which we give you right now, reflect our impression from both your essay and discussion.

Many thanks and all the best,

Alexey Burov.

report post as inappropriate

George Kirakosyan wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 11:17 GMT
Hi dear Rajiv

You have present one interesting and well narrated work that seems to me as deserving to a good rating, in first glance. I am saying this because for me somewhat is difficult to say something more definitely, as I cannot spent the necessary time to properly study it and say to you something more useful on this. I see just that you are somewhat skeptical on the opportunity to positive solution of contest question in whole, in that formulation as it are suggested. Here we can be like-minded definitely (if I'm right in my impression!) So, I just would simply to ask you (as the time is limited) to open my work to seen can we suggest each to others some useful remarks. Hope you will answer in my page and we well continue this talk. And, here is nothing mandatory, my dear!

My good wishes

report post as inappropriate

Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 08:18 GMT
Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use «spam».

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.


Dizhechko Boris

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.