show all replies (1 not shown)

hide replies

Nice essay Neil Bates,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent for eg…

Let's first ask: could a classical universe turn out like ours did? You might be tempted to start by saying: maybe, just look at the Solar System and other gravitationally-bound complexes. But no. Yes, solar systems are impressive, but are fragile to outside interaction.

Here I describe a classical...

view entire post

Nice essay Neil Bates,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent for eg…

Let's first ask: could a classical universe turn out like ours did? You might be tempted to start by saying: maybe, just look at the Solar System and other gravitationally-bound complexes. But no. Yes, solar systems are impressive, but are fragile to outside interaction.

Here I describe a classical universe using Newtonian Physics…………

………………… At this point I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where ……………reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe is described. Dynamic Universe Model is another mathematical model for Universe. Its mathematics show that the movement of masses will be having a purpose or goal, Different Galaxies will be born and die (quench) etc…just have a look at my essay… “Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe” where UGF (Universal Gravitational force) acting on each and every mass, will create a direction and purpose of movement…..

I think intension is inherited from Universe itself to all Biological systems

For your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based on experimental results. Here in Dynamic Universe Model Space is Space and time is time in cosmology level or in any level. In the classical general relativity, space and time are convertible in to each other.

Many papers and books on Dynamic Universe Model were published by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example ‘Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary’ (1994) , ‘Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe’, About “SITA” simulations, ‘Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required’, “New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations”, “Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background”, “Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.”, in 2015 ‘Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, ‘Explaining Pioneer anomaly’, ‘Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets’, ‘Observation of super luminal neutrinos’, ‘Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up’, “Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto” etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe.

With axioms like… No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true, like Blue shifted Galaxies and no dark matter. Dynamic Universe Model gave many results otherwise difficult to explain

Have a look at my essay on Dynamic Universe Model and its blog also where all my books and papers are available for free downloading…

http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

Be
st wishes to your essay.

For your blessings please…………….

=snp. gupta

view post as summary

Hi Neil,

thanks for a very intriguing essay. Calling on quantum mechanics will, I suppose, invite the usual criticism about how quantum mechanics is typically thought to play no role at the scales where we expect to find an explanation for goal-oriented behaviour. I think your take correctly deflects this criticism: while we may not find relevant quantum effects persisting at this level,...

view entire post

Hi Neil,

thanks for a very intriguing essay. Calling on quantum mechanics will, I suppose, invite the usual criticism about how quantum mechanics is typically thought to play no role at the scales where we expect to find an explanation for goal-oriented behaviour. I think your take correctly deflects this criticism: while we may not find relevant quantum effects persisting at this level, this doesn't mean that quantum mechanics is explanatorily irrelevant. It may, on the contrary, serve to explain phenomena otherwise mysterious within a classical view of the world---a prominent example being the very stability and extendedness of ordinary matter, which is taken to be simply a primitive posit in classical mechanics, explained only later on by means of quantization and the Pauli exclusion principle.

So, seeing how it already helps dispelling the mystery of Descartes' res extensa's very extendedness, one should think it at least worth investigating whether it cannot do the same for his res cogitans!

On a different note, I'm not quite sure about your treatment of the Chinese Room, or your arithmetic variant: your AR is essentially something like the 'lookup table' machine, that can duplicate the performance of an intelligent agent merely by looking up inputs in a gigantic table, producing apparently intelligent outputs in return, thus 'fooling' any Turing tester. One usually supposes that, just as you claim there is no addition being performed within the AR, this lookup machine doesn't possess any intelligence---but I think a more accurate view is that it simply relies on 'stored' intelligence, since it took an intelligent being to draw up the table in the first place (otherwise, there are no criteria according to whether a stored reply is actually an 'intelligent' one).

Likewise, in order to draw up the results of the 'addition table' you propose, somebody (or something) had to draw up that table in the first place; and drawing it up could certainly be understood as 'performing addition'. So it's not that there is no addition in your AR, it's just that the addition has been time-shifted---the room relies on precomputation, as indeed computers often do (and people often used to do, see the logarithm tables of times past; which of course themselves had to be laboriously computed). Hence, a determined proponent of 'intelligence-is-as-intelligence-does' behaviourism might resist your argument there; but I think there are ample other arguments to show the hopelessness of the position.

Good luck in the contest!

Cheers,

Jochen

view post as summary