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

Sue Lingo: on 5/31/18 at 17:42pm UTC, wrote Hello FQXi community... The link to the UQS "E=mc^2" to "Zen of Quantum...

Sue Lingo: on 5/5/18 at 18:54pm UTC, wrote Hi Marcel... Your FQXi Topic:1928 post of Aug. 30, 2017 @ 00:19 GMT caught...

Marcel-Marie LeBel: on 5/3/18 at 16:58pm UTC, wrote Sue, Please have a read at my essay. Yes, the fundamental is knowable! ...

Paul Butler: on 5/3/18 at 15:40pm UTC, wrote Dear Sue, I await your response. The contest pages stay on the site and...

Sue Lingo: on 4/19/18 at 2:16am UTC, wrote Hi Paul... Appreciate your thoughtful response, and will at first...

Paul Butler: on 4/14/18 at 17:14pm UTC, wrote Dear Sue, I checked on your paper’s page and was able to expand your...

Sue Lingo: on 3/29/18 at 3:19am UTC, wrote Hi Paul... Thanks for your thoughtful review of my essay. Please note: My...

Paul Butler: on 3/21/18 at 17:45pm UTC, wrote Dear Sue, I read your paper and found that your approach can be useful. ...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Georgina Woodward: "I wrote " As the EMr has periodic motion it is invariant under..." in Breaking the Universe's...

Georgina Woodward: "That should say: Pythagorean mathematics can be used to compare the seen..." in Breaking the Universe's...

Joe Fisher: "Robert Lawrence Kuhn ℅ Closer To Truth November 17, 2018 Ref: Get out..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Agus uye: "The page is very amazing happy to be on your page I found your page from..." in If the world ended...

Zimmer man: "Excellent and useful information, thanks for the list. androdumpper apk..." in Neutrino mysteries,...

Edwin Knox: "The genuine Earth had a genuine VISIBLE surface for many years previously..." in Superhuman: Book Review...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Zeeya Merali, Reality am not a humanly contrived finite..." in Alternative Models of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.

Constructing a Theory of Life
An all-encompassing framework of physics could help to explain the evolution of consciousness, intelligence, and free will.

Usurping Quantum Theory
The search is on for a fundamental framework that allows for even stranger links between particles than quantum theory—which could lead us to a theory of everything.

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.


FQXi FORUM
November 19, 2018

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017 [back]
TOPIC: Knowledge Base (KB) Access as Fundamental to Info Processor Intelligence by Sue Lingo [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Sue Lingo wrote on Jan. 11, 2018 @ 17:12 GMT
Essay Abstract

Which came first, human conceptualization of a Source Emission, or human conceptualization of a Gravity Collapse? Whether discovered of invented, knowledge has no sustainable integrity without a fundamental unit of structure... i.e. "knowledge cannot prove itself". My essay analysis of "fundamental" is in terms of Knowledge Base (KB) access directory structures, and I explore the concept of a minimum binary bit differential as a minimum Quanta of Fundamental Information (QFI), upon which to give sustainable structure to the human Knowledge Base (KB). With reference to: World Science Festival: "Limits of Understanding", Dr. Mario Livio's assertion that "... we CAN NOT know what is fundamental.", I utilize a Knowledge Base (KB) Directory, derived from a spherical unified quantization emergence model of Space/Energy/Time/Information, to make a case, that one CAN know what is fundamental, and that accepting/promoting an inability to know what is fundamental, sets a dangerously unreliable/unstable course for human Knowledge Base (KB) emergence, and subsequently human evolution.

Author Bio

Independent Research: 2000-2018 UQS Author/Logician ... website content generation and host to over 5K annual (2017) .php logged worldwide virtual visitors to the Unified Quantization of a Singularity (UQS) Project: www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com Knowledge Base: Open Root SOURCE Directory... but as a consequence of undergraduate and graduate studies at the University of Washington; Dept. of Architecture... Seattle, WA, 1972-1979, my analysis tend to be structural/geometry, and I admit a research bias of "form follows function".

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Georgina Woodward wrote on Jan. 12, 2018 @ 10:21 GMT
Sue, I liked that your presentation is refreshingly different but after several pages the novelty wore off and I found it increasingly annoying and difficult to follow. I think it might appeal to people who work IT or similar fields who are familiar and comfortable with that kind of structure. I like that there is some humour in there.

Would you be so kind as to describe what you mean by "resolved Spherical Singularity Gate geometry in plain English (sentences if you don't mind). I do not want to go to the linked site.

Kind regards Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sue Lingo replied on Jan. 13, 2018 @ 02:26 GMT
Hi Georgina,

Thanks for your comments!!

Alpha and/or numeric semantics and/or equations introduce a interpretive error potential which should if at all possible be avoided in any discussion of Spatial fundamentals... thus I have preference for geometry.

To accommodate your preference for semantics in a manner least likely to introduce interpretation errors and/or necessitates reiteration ad infinitum:

Resolved: cognitive Spatial comprehension attained/verified utilizing CAD environment.

Spherical: equal distribution in all Spatial directions from a single point.

Singularity: the Spatial volume described by the distribution.

Gate: the logicon created by Singularity closure.

Geometry: the CAD environment in which the Spatial relationships... e.g. direction, point, Singularity, volume, distribution... are graphically defined for precise cognitive Spatial comprehension.

I agree my approach can be "difficult to follow"... i.e. requires tenacious focus, and a familiarity w/ digital processor boot mechanix is almost essential... thus I must rely heavily on illustrations and I therefor REF: UQS Origin Singularity Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQST-TVNH.php

If a more generic illustration is required for a readers' comprehension I suggest REF: UQS Consciousness Investigation Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSConInv.php

Thanks again Georgina... all comments are appreciated.

S. Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share


Georgina Woodward replied on Jan. 15, 2018 @ 05:14 GMT
Hi Sue, thank you for the word list. The links seem to go to the same place and show some shapes and ideas about geometry and the mind. I couldn't see any key to meaning of the colouring on the various shapes.

In your essay you write " In that the concept of Spherical Singularity Gate has been given valid Spatial geometry form, and mathematically constructed in a digital CAD environment." that says to me you have used a computer to draw a shape which represents your concept (also represented by the word list you supplied). Quote " our mathematicians and theoreticians can now digitally "see" and thus virtually "know" a minimum Quanta of Fundamental Information (QFI) as constituent underlying all subsequent. " How is the coloured shape a minimum quanta of information?

Quote (from the linked web site):"In retrospect I want to emphasize herein that a digital processor... e.g. a human mind... utilizing a Unified Network, has logic functions available to it ... e.g. a minimum unit of Energy (QE) and a minimum unit of Space (QI)..., that can resolve Energy/Space/Time phenomena in a manner not available to a digital processer... e.g. a human mind... that can NOT verify an unbroken kinematic chain from observed phenomena to it's Energy Point Source."S. Lingo retrieved from http://uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQST-TVNH.php Jan 2018. Sounds like 'Does not compute to me'. I have found Venn diagrams useful.

Kind regards Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Sue Lingo wrote on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 03:08 GMT
Hi Georgina...

Thanks for your re-my-reply, and the opportunity to correct link errors.

My cut&paste apologies... i.e. the "more generic" visual/graphic illustration should have referenced REF: UQS Consciousness Investigation Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSConInv.php

"I couldn't see any key to meaning of the colouring on the various shapes."~ GW

...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Jan. 16, 2018 @ 20:04 GMT
Dear Sue Lingo,

I have concluded from my deep research 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 Sue Lingo replied on Jan. 18, 2018 @ 19:05 GMT
Hi Joe...

I can not argue that Nature can devise the only possible "Universe", but in that Nature chose Space as the canvas for it's animated creation, I can model Nature's creation as a Space/Energy/Time/Information geometry model in a CAD environment and can animate the pulsed emission of minimum units of Energy (QE) as digital sprites.

REF: UQS Consciousness Investigation Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSConInv.php

Do you have a geometry model of a "one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface"?

One dimension is a lateral line, i.e. no planar or volumetric... i.e. no surface.

"Illuminated" as in made knowable as information?

A "finite non-surface light" as one dimensional rays from a single source?

My animated model of Nature's creation is an investigation of a minimum unit of Energy (QE) Emission equal in all directions from a single Origin Source.

REF: UQS Consciousness Investigation Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSConInv.php

The more clearly one understands the creation, the more appreciative one can be of it.



Thanks for you comments Joe... all comments are appreciated.

S. Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 23:08 GMT
Hi Sue Lingo

Your OP “Which came first, human conceptualization of a Source Emission, or human conceptualization of a Gravity Collapse?” is very good , here I want to add in Dynamic Universe Model there is no gravity collapse……..dear Sue Lingo….

Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sue Lingo replied on Jan. 29, 2018 @ 03:24 GMT
Hi snp...

Thanks for reading my abstract...

As per my essay, in that one can resolve Black Holes as Energy Choreography Scale Transformers, in which Mass density disassembles Physical scale entity choreographies of Energy information, manifesting more "fundamental" entity choreographies of Energy information, which gravity, as defined in terms of Mass has no influence upon... i.e. Energy choreography scale/state change... one can make an analogy to heat density vaporizing water, and a gravity collapse is not necessitated.

Does the Dynamic Universe Model define Gravity in terms of Mass attraction?

By what mechanism does electromagnetic radiation initially emerge, in the Dynamic Universe Model?



Does the Dynamic Universe Model Accelerating Expanding universe have a Spatial geometry defined Origin Source?

Given the plethora of theories being promoted, and limited time, I have a bias for visual/graphic geometry... REF: UQS Origin Singularity Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQST-TVNH.php

That being the case, I have established a criteria for my review of any one model.

If the Dynamic Universe Model facilitates a geometry/graphic visualization of an Origin Source and it's Singularity... i.e. the field geometry quantization encapsulating the point Source of Emission, thus defining a minimum quanta of Space (QI), in which to distribute Source pulsed minimum quanta of Energy (QE) equal in all directions ... I will read your essay, and browse http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

Thank you Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta for your comments, all comments stimulate my cognitive processes.

S. Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 30, 2018 @ 20:22 GMT
Dear Fellow Essayists

This will be my final plea for fair treatment.,

FQXI is clearly seeking to find out if there is a fundamental REALITY.

Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe must consist 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.

Only the truth can set you free.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Feb. 1, 2018 @ 01:45 GMT
Hi Joe...

Maybe there is a semantic issue here?... i.e. I normally associate surface with Spatial concepts.

What constitutes a "dimension" in your theory?

By what mechanism does nature create a "one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface"?

Belief is no substitute for knowing, and theory can be an evasion of a requirement for underlying principle.

S. Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 1, 2018 @ 15:31 GMT
Sue,

Brilliant! You proved Livio false, and I agree Mies, Geometry & Godel are true. Well argued but hard to read = low scores, but I'm not so easily fooled. As a (long) tenacious investigator astronomer also architect (etc) I think your on the right road for your quest, but we're heading in opposite directions. I hope you may look where I've been.

There's a 3D quantum scale dynamic picture of re-emission (or two) as a classical mechanism (spherically here = QM) and toroidal based 'black hole' (actually AGN) re-ionization of matter at multiple scales (published - or Google HST Crab Nebula core shots). You'll find the cat alive in the Cartesian box (NOT a wire frame!). You may even catch RNA mutations and others of interest coming out of last years essay (with pictures!) As motion is important a first glimpse of the spherical model is in this 100 second video.

But a question; Nature seems curvy & wavy, (even if it's spherical -as translation makes it helical) may it not be reduction to binary choices that looses truth and logical consistency? I've proposed replacing the problematic 'excluded middle' with Sine curves and a 'Law of the Reducing Middle.' (Send 'hard shoulder' binary codes down a Fibre Optic cable and that's what nature does to them!). So you're not just 'stoned or not stoned' but you may then be hit by 1 or 100. Does Godel not then make sense?

Of course you're right it's the "..constraints imposed by one's own fears." that prevents admission of advancements in understanding to doctrine (my 2015 essay, scored top, is lost in the ether).

I'm uplifted. Thank you. I hope to discuss more. Top job and top score.

Best

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sue Lingo replied on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 19:17 GMT
Hi Peter...

Thanks for having the tenacious focus required to wade through what I realize is an essay that does not stand up well to a speedread.

That we are headed in opposite directions, grants opportunity to verify the UQS field quantization... i.e. one of the criteria of a valid unified field is that "if headed in opposite directions" we meet, the quantization geometry of the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 21:19 GMT
Thanks Sue. looking forward to it.

Did I mention my 'Law of the Reducing Middle'? No more 'binary' exclusion, removes the paradox in logic! It's a Bayesian/Gausian distribution, just like most of nature. We can now be 'stoned' a bit not just not at all or to death!

By the way, to shock even more I've also falsified Cartesian 'wire frame' co-ordinate maths. If we use 'Cartesian Planes' making boxes which can move within & without each other but with transformations between the spaces (Maxwell's TZ's) I found logic returns. Might that solve the issue you mention?

And don't get me on Cosmology and redshift without accelerating expansion - the video's half an hour! This one's good though; Map of the Universe The Great Attractor & Laniakea.

very best.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

richard kingsley nixey replied on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 20:51 GMT
Sue,

Hard work to read but excellent and agreeable. Well done.

Richard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 14:06 GMT
Dear Sue

If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please?

A couple of days in and semblance of my essay taking form, however the house bound inactivity was wearing me. I had just the remedy, so took off for a solo sail across the bay. In the lea of cove, I had underestimated the open water wind strengths. My sail...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Christian Corda wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 13:29 GMT
Dear Sue,

Thanks for visiting my Essay page.

In all honesty, I must confess that it has not been simple for me reading and understanding your Essay. In fact, I had to read it twice. I think that the second time was fruitful because such a second reading was pleasant and I think to have understood something. Being a theorist of gravitation, I found interesting your referring to black holes. Your statement that "It may be that a gravity collapse concept preceded actualization/verification of a Black Hole Physical/entity observation, but that is not always the case" is correct, because black hole formation depends on the initial mass of the collapsing object.

I have a question. is your statement that "a gravity collapse disassembles Physical scale entity choreographies of Energy information, freeing Metaphysical scale entity choreographies of Energy information, which a gravity collapse apparently has no influence upon" a proposal to resolve the black hole information puzzle?

In any case, you wrote a nice and entertaining Essay, deserving my high score.

Good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sue Lingo replied on Mar. 4, 2018 @ 19:41 GMT
Hi Christian...

Thanks for your review of my essay.

I write and sequence digital code conditionals, which does not necessarily enhance my communication skills, and I try not to burden others with my info dense feed... i.e. I rely heavily on visual geometry... but the Topic: "What is fundamental?", mandated I "give a vote", and yes, a month reducing 20 years of UQS project...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Paul N Butler wrote on Mar. 21, 2018 @ 17:45 GMT
Dear Sue,

I read your paper and found that your approach can be useful. Although, in a way, FQXI tries to frame the contest subject around existing currently accepted theory, such as quantum mechanics and relativity, etc., papers that are accepted for the contest generally allow for a relatively wide range of variation. My papers in the contests on this site, which go into the layer of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sue Lingo replied on Mar. 29, 2018 @ 03:19 GMT
Hi Paul...

Thanks for your thoughtful review of my essay.

Please note: My post have been truncated by the FQXi system without option to "view entire post"?... but I log all UQS Social Media and Forum commo online.

REF:UQS Social Media and Forum Log http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSSMF.php

It is my contention that CAD/SIM analysis, perhaps even the Unified...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Paul N Butler replied on Apr. 14, 2018 @ 17:14 GMT
Dear Sue,

I checked on your paper’s page and was able to expand your comment to me on your page and also your comment on my page ok.

I will start with your comment to me on your page and number my responses to the paragraphs starting with (1.) in response to your paragraph that starts with “It is my contention that CAD/SIM analysis,”.

1. CAD/SIM analysis can be used to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sue Lingo replied on Apr. 19, 2018 @ 02:16 GMT
Hi Paul...

Appreciate your thoughtful response, and will at first opportunity reciprocate in kind.

However, if FQXi does not graciously maintain contestant essay pages after May 1st., I will need an e-contact.

In the interim, if one keeps in mind that UQS is not a belief/theory... i.e. UQS is a math model that resolves a visual geometry solution, and associated digital code, for pulsed distribution of minimum units of Energy (QE) equal in all directions from a single point source... one can find answers n the UQS Project on-line archived papers, to many of the question you pose.

For example: "23. Why only 24 points around the initial point? Are these 24 QI positions spread only in a two dimensional plane around the initial point or are these 24 points spread over three dimensions?"... is contextually addressed and 3D CAD illustrated at:

Comparative Singularity Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQST-TVNH.php

Thanks again Paul, for sharing your insights and providing opportunity for exchange.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

WWW.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share



Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on May. 3, 2018 @ 16:58 GMT
Sue,

Please have a read at my essay. Yes, the fundamental is knowable!

But we have to identify it... in the logic of the universe.

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sue Lingo replied on May. 5, 2018 @ 18:54 GMT
Hi Marcel...

Your FQXi Topic:1928 post of Aug. 30, 2017 @ 00:19 GMT caught my attention, and I actually composed a 4 page reply to that post... but it has not been edited yet.

I have now read your essay, and will get back to you with commentary... but I wear all hats on the UQS project and am now in a code phase... i.e. absolute focus mandatory to progress.

In the interim, I will reference you to UQS Consciousness Investigation Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSConInv.php

Therein, I think you might identify parallels in our motivation... i.e. "A formalized logical system will have to be developed, with mathematics, logic, and the “how” side of physics helping us stay in line."... if not our resolve.

Thanks for sharing your insights and providing opportunity for our exchange.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

WWW.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Bookmark and Share



Author Sue Lingo wrote on May. 31, 2018 @ 17:42 GMT
Hello FQXi community...

The link to the UQS "E=mc^2" to "Zen of Quantum Mechanix" review of Author Marcel-Marie LeBel's Jan. 9, 2018 @ 20:52 GMT essay is:

- Topic: "The Logical State of What Underlies our Reality" ... Sue Lingo reply on May. 26, 2018 @ 17:57 GMT

or... UQS Social Media and Forum Log http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSSMF.php

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

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.