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

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 4/7/17 at 5:05am UTC, wrote Dear Sirs! Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of...

John Schultz: on 3/28/17 at 2:25am UTC, wrote Thanks for your comments. You are right that I was a bit careless with...

Peter Jackson: on 3/26/17 at 13:53pm UTC, wrote John, That's quite brilliant! Original, interesting, very pertinent, and...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 3/15/17 at 5:47am UTC, wrote Nice essay Schultz, Your ideas and thinking are excellent like…. IF...

Joe Fisher: on 3/13/17 at 16:30pm UTC, wrote Dear John S Schultz, Please excuse me for I have no intention of...

John Schultz: on 3/7/17 at 16:35pm UTC, wrote Essay Abstract The apparent tension between mindless mathematical...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Edwin Pole II: "Sorry for elementary question. Trying to understand quantum theory. Basic..." in Ed Witten on the Nature...

John Taylor: "Tell me what you think of this thought experiment: How significant are..." in Physics of the Observer...

Steve Dufourny: "Hello all, Congratulations to winners and thanks to FQXi for this..." in What Is Fundamental? –...

Hector Zenil: "Thanks. Yes, that link shows the prerequisites. I can add that at times..." in New Online Course:...

Laverne Klein: "Nice one" in FQXi's New Large Grant...

Yahoo support: "I actually did not understand the blog what the author wants to convey, so..." in Co-Travelers

reseller propolis: "Khasiat Propolis Brazil Khasiat Propolis Brazil Khasiat Propolis Brazil ..." in DNA Dust

reseller propolis: "Khasiat Propolis Brazil Khasiat Propolis Brazil Khasiat Propolis Brazil ..." in Is the world made of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Fuzzballs v Black Holes
A radical theory replaces the cosmic crunchers with fuzzy quantum spheres, potentially solving the black-hole information paradox and explaining away the Big Bang and the origin of time.

Whose Physics Is It Anyway? Q&A with Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
Why physics and astronomy communities must take diversity issues seriously in order to do good science.

Why Time Might Not Be an Illusion
Einstein’s relativity pushes physicists towards a picture of the universe as a block, in which the past, present, and future all exist on the same footing; but maybe that shift in thinking has gone too far.

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.


FQXi FORUM
May 26, 2018

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Thoughts on the Mathematics of Cerebration by John S Schultz [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author John S Schultz wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 16:35 GMT
Essay Abstract

The apparent tension between mindless mathematical law and aims and intentions is based on an unconscious assumption of the algorithmicity of mathematical laws. This paper is a brief exploration of the possibility that mathematical laws of science, in general, and cerebration in particular, need not be algorithmic. There is no attempt to prove the possibility. It is just a speculative description of what I take to be the landscape involved.

Author Bio

Graduated from MIT course 18, moved to Vermont, founded Green Mountain Valley School (and several other businesses.) My current business is Super Thin Saws

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 16:30 GMT
Dear John S Schultz,

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.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 15, 2017 @ 05:47 GMT
Nice essay Schultz,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent like….

IF there ARE types of non-algorithmic mathematical patterns that are not PAPR, and

IF they are not approximatable by algorithmic patterns, and

IF Mother Nature has chosen such a pattern for human cerebration,

A Good proposal, I fully agree with you…………

………………… On...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Mar. 26, 2017 @ 13:53 GMT
John,

That's quite brilliant! Original, interesting, very pertinent, and despite it's brevity NOT deserving of a lowly spot! I love rooting out and challenging hidden assumptions, think it's very important to do so, and I think you do that very well here. I challenged assumptions about mathematics, logic and nature last year (and use that as part of my ontology this year) and I particularly like and agree your;

"Science is way of studying THE PATTERNS OF NATURE, ...and

Mathematics is a way of studying THE NATURE OF PATTERN"


But one question; Does a 'mathematical law' not require to be 'known' to qualify as a law? So is there anything non algorithmic which qualifies as a law? I accept that may be purely semantic as we need to extend the understanding of Law as you infer, incuding in;"whatever law governs cerebration".

My own essay identifies a mechanism without offering an algorithm. I hope you may get to read it and discuss.

Very best

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author John S Schultz replied on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 02:25 GMT
Thanks for your comments. You are right that I was a bit careless with terminology. Mea culpa. Fortunately, I think, it is only terminological. The point really has to do with patterns, and not with whether any of us hairless apes on 21st century Earth have noticed the patterns.

It's a very busy few months at work (which is why my essay is so short,) so I have not yet managed to read any other essays. Mea culpa once more. Hopefully I'll have time next week or the week after. JS

Bookmark and Share



Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 05:05 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.

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris

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.