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

Stephen Ternyik: on 2/11/18 at 18:17pm UTC, wrote Will look into it, dear Boris Semyonovich. Many thanks: stephen

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 2/11/18 at 17:45pm UTC, wrote Dear Stephen I. Ternyik I appreciate you for your good thoughts. The coming...

James Hoover: on 2/6/18 at 18:22pm UTC, wrote Stephen, Seems to be sparse reviewing and rating in this essay contest so...

Eckard Blumschein: on 2/5/18 at 16:33pm UTC, wrote When Israel decided to get rid of 40,000 African immigrants, they argued...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 1/26/18 at 12:02pm UTC, wrote Dear Stephen, Thank you for pushing me up.... I also did the same, now...

Cristinel Stoica: on 1/26/18 at 9:40am UTC, wrote Dear Stephen, Very well written essay, focused on fundamental actual...

Stephen Ternyik: on 1/26/18 at 8:57am UTC, wrote OK, SNP Gupta, will be done.

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 1/25/18 at 21:21pm UTC, wrote Hi Stephen I. Ternyik Very nice thinking and presentation on...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Robert McEachern: ""At the risk of stroking physicists’ egos, physics is hard" But every..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

George Musser: "Imagine you could feed the data of the world into a computer and have it..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "Personally Joe me I see like that ,imagine that this infinite eternal..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "Joe it is wonderful this,so you are going to have a nobel prize in..." in First Things First: The...

Robert McEachern: ""I'm not sure that the 'thing as it is' is irrelevant." It is not. It is..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

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

Steve Dufourny: "is it just due to a problem when we utilise names of persons?" in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Georgina Woodward: "I suggested the turnstiles separate odd form even numbered tickets randomly..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...


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 17, 2019

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: The Fundamentality of Exponentiality by Stephen I. Ternyik [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 10, 2018 @ 20:51 GMT
Essay Abstract

This essay deals with techological evolution as continuation of biological evolution; it addresses the change of scientific fundamentals by exponentiality.

Author Bio

Stephen I. Ternyik Social scientist/Economist (-1985) Researcher/Entrepreneur

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Georgina Woodward wrote on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 03:44 GMT
Hi Stephen. I liked reading your very different response to the essay question topic, I think we are heading into 'interesting times' Kind regards Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 09:07 GMT
Yes Georgina, 'interesting times' are ahead of us: the vulnerability of science is fundamental as you precisely stated in your essay.I can only contribute with my expertise in social science, but started with experimental science forty years ago.

Bookmark and Share



Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 16:54 GMT
Stephen,

We individually used to be able to make all the tools we needed. Everything we use now we could never make. We are user, not makers. We could turn individually to art or other hobbies in order to give us a sense potentiality. But the skills we shall never surrender to the rest of society is survival skills.

The very first human skill is to know how to make, maintain and use a fire. Do they teach this one in school?

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 17:17 GMT
Basic life skills are essential, for sure Marcel ! A common saying goes, that there were only 3 great human inventions: the fire, the Wheel and central banking.So, the fire remains basic; I am also in youth education, and I am teaching this skill.

Bookmark and Share



Eckard Blumschein wrote on Jan. 12, 2018 @ 09:58 GMT
Hi Stephen S. Ternik,

I guess, exponentiality means growth according to an exponential function of time.

May I ask you to read in this respect what I wrote in my previous essays "Towards more reasonable evolution" and "Peace via discoveries and inventions"? Kadin wrote an essay "Just too many people". Do you agree with Putin who declared Kim Un a successful good leader? How many people do mankind and science require? How much waste and risk does our planet tolerate?

Eckard Blumschein

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 12, 2018 @ 11:05 GMT
We have definitely too few scientists and researchers, Eckhard; only 1% of humankind has basic knowledge of scientific methodology, logic included. Balancing the problems of eco-logical behavior and social inequality can only be addressed by monetary reform; at the moment, we are closer to ecocide in earthland.I will take a look in the mentioned essays, many thanks.

Bookmark and Share


Eckard Blumschein replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 16:33 GMT
When Israel decided to get rid of 40,000 African immigrants, they argued that nearly every such woman between 16 and 60 years is pregnant. While this is certainly exaggerated, it illustrates a problem of earthland. Ecocide cannot be addressed by monetary reform and social equality. I vote for rethinking human rights: Cruel natural balance must be replaced by responsibility.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 12:02 GMT
Dear Stephen,

Very interesting, in-depth analysis of science and society, problems of fundamentality and conclusions.

Success!

Sincerely, Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 14, 2018 @ 12:19 GMT
Many thanks, Vladimir. I am trying to develop the logical foundation of the observations on exponentiality; next 2-3 decades (prediction and social response options).

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Jan. 15, 2018 @ 21:39 GMT
Dear Stephen I. Ternyi,

You wrote: “The coming fundamental shift in scientific methodology (ideas and methods) will close our knowledge gap between the interplay of matter and living matter, concerning the construction principles of nature and its origin.”

My research has concluded that Nature must have devised the only permanent real structure of the Universe obtainable for the real Universe existed for millions of years before man and his finite complex informational systems ever appeared on earth. The real physical Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 05:43 GMT
Dear Joe Fisher ! Your approach is known to me and I have rated your essay some days ago. Many thanks.

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 18:05 GMT
Stephen,

Never thought of exponentiality as a noun before, but I can see it is a pertinent term in today's cyber-bound society. A recent article mentioned citizen astronomers utilizing the massive amount of data from Kepler to find exoplanet systems. Kepler scientists couldn't keep up. I see the application of exponentiality of data accumulation here. Your approach to What is Fundamental is quite informative and revealing about our technological times. It is a lot to cover in such a short space. I found that problem with mine as well. I especially liked your shift of scientific fundamentals. Many I could see but there were too many to do justice to in our short format. I enjoyed your essay and thank you for taking the time to look at and comment on mine.

Regards,

Jim Hoover

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 20, 2018 @ 18:39 GMT
Many thanks for your feedback, Jim ! Of course, would be great, if FQXI contest could take a longer time as there are so many interesting contributions. In any case, it was a pleasure to read your essay and to learn from it. Best: stephen

Bookmark and Share



Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 01:52 GMT
Dear Stephen I. Ternyik,

What a pleasure to read what I interpret as an optimistic appreciation of the remarkable times we're living in. Yes, there are problems, but it's happening so fast and everywhere, so it is hard to immediately grasp it. Of course, being aware of such may not make it any easier, but it certainly makes it more interesting!

My best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 21, 2018 @ 11:03 GMT
This is a new historical type of human learning curve, dear Edwin ! The exponential speed is indeed very high, and we are part of a running experiment. Cognition and logic are the keys to cope with the change of fundamentals, in scientitifc practice and in human life.

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Jan. 22, 2018 @ 20:37 GMT
Stephen,

Great little essay. At once uplifting and somewhat concerning! Mine also predicts revolution, but from a better understanding identified therein. Yours goes rather deeper and gives an interesting and quite original portent.

I certainly agree; "The scientific method...needs constant updating, in ethical and technical terms." But it seems difficult enough to even get science to employ it at present! Will we really achieve that fundamentally important aim?

Well done, worth as high a points per word count ratio as Declan Trail's (but for quite different reasons I hope you can read ours together to see).

Best

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 23, 2018 @ 08:13 GMT
Exponentiality will change the fundamentals of science, Peter; if this will be a revolutionary event, as you write in your essay on simplicity,remains an open guess, because simplicity is complex and complexity is simple, i.e. the paradox is an element of scientific progress.

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Jan. 23, 2018 @ 12:41 GMT
Stephen,

Thanks, and for your comments on (& scoring I assume) mine. I got good odds on paradigm change at 2020 8yrs ago. I have hope but scant encouragement so far. I'm scoring yours now as it's languishing a bit.

Very best

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 23, 2018 @ 13:35 GMT
Many thanks, Peter ! FQXI is fun and learning, at the same time. Yes, I pushed yours a bit. Best: stephen

Bookmark and Share



Declan Andrew Traill wrote on Jan. 24, 2018 @ 02:40 GMT
Dear Stephen,

Please see my comment at the end of the previous thread (Peter Jackson’s comment)...

Best Regards,

Declan Traill

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 25, 2018 @ 21:21 GMT
Hi Stephen I. Ternyik

Very nice thinking and presentation on “techological evolution as continuation of biological evolution and change scientific fundamentals by exponentiality” dear Stephen I. Ternyik…..…..….. very nice idea…. I highly appreciate your essay and hope you please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable &...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Stephen I. Ternyik replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 08:57 GMT
OK, SNP Gupta, will be done.

Bookmark and Share


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 12:02 GMT
Dear Stephen,

Thank you for pushing me up.... I also did the same, now your score reads 6.2... Best wishes to your essay

=snp

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristinel Stoica wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 09:40 GMT
Dear Stephen,

Very well written essay, focused on fundamental actual problems of humanity. You did a thorough and considerate analysis of the current situation, of the not-so-distant future, and of the (fortunately dynamical) limits of applicability of science in solving these problems, especially due to its (perhaps necessary) ethical neutrality. I wish you success in the contest!

Best wishes,

Cristi

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 18:22 GMT
Stephen,

Seems to be sparse reviewing and rating in this essay contest so far. I am revisiting those I have reviewed and see if I have scored them before the deadline approaches. I find that I have on 1/20.

Best of luck.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Feb. 11, 2018 @ 17:45 GMT
Dear Stephen I. Ternyik I appreciate you for your good thoughts. The coming fundamental shift in scientific methodology (ideas and methods) will close our knowledge gap between the interplay of matter and living matter, concerning the construction principles of nature and its origin. This fundamental shift will happen if the scientific community accepts the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes. Look at my essay, FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes. I hope you will not leave without attention to this principle and appreciate good New Cartesian Physics for his radicalism

Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Feb. 11, 2018 @ 18:17 GMT
Will look into it, dear Boris Semyonovich. Many thanks: stephen

Bookmark and Share



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.