CATEGORY:
FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017
[back]
TOPIC:
Socrates, Atoms, and Being: A Dialogue by Mozibur Rahman Ullah
[refresh]
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah wrote on Feb. 2, 2018 @ 19:35 GMT
Essay AbstractSocrates, Theaetetus and Polydorus gather in the the house of Theaetetus to discuss the meaning of atoms, being and what is understood by the word fundamental.
Author BioHas studied mathematics at Oxford and Physics at Imperial College London. Worked as a software engineer in finance. Currently an independent researcher in the philosophy and history of physics.
Download Essay PDF File
Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 08:48 GMT
Dear Mozibur Rahman Ullah, You in an original way, through dialogue of ancient Greek philosophers have designated a problem of the fundamental in physics and have told: There is no law except there is no law and this is what is fundamental.
I'm curious to know, to say your. Theaetatus, Полидемус and Socrates on the principle of the identity of space and matter of Descartes. Look at my essay,
FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris SemyonovichWhere I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows this principle. Evaluate it according to your fundamental concept and leave your comment there. Then I'll give you a rating. Do not allow New Cartesian Physics go away into nothingness.
Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.
post approved
Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich replied on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 08:57 GMT
Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich replied on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 09:03 GMT
Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich replied on Feb. 4, 2018 @ 07:43 GMT
I apologize. I gave you the wrong link. Here's how it should be.
FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Look at my essay, where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows the principle of the identity of space and matter of Descartes. Evaluate and leave your comment there. Then I'll give you a rating. Ask for Descartes. Do not allow New Cartesian Physics go away into nothingness.
Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.
report post as inappropriate
a l wrote on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 10:12 GMT
Well done! Hofstadter became famous by showing that 3 emblematic names point at the same idea, while your essay (and mine, for that matter) try to show that there are 3 most general distinct worldviews. Dealing with the question why 3 and not 4 or 2 might also be interesting. And let me mention that your contribution is fun to read: people around here apparently do not notice that fundamental begins with fun.
Best.
a.losev
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 20:27 GMT
Thanks, I made an effort to make the dialogue entertaining as well as informative. I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Joe Fisher wrote on Feb. 3, 2018 @ 15:54 GMT
Dear Mozibur Rahman Ullah,
FQXi.org is clearly seeking to confirm whether Nature is fundamental.
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
post approved
Francesco D'Isa wrote on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 21:01 GMT
Dear Mozibur Rahman Ullah,
a very pleasurable essay, really in Plato's style, thank you for sharing!
> It seems that we are agreed that law is fundamental. There is no law except there is no law and this is what is fundamental.
I'm sorry to admit that I didn't catch the final part. Do you mean that there's not only one law? That there's no fundamental law a part of this one?
All the best,
Francesco
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 20:33 GMT
Dear Francesco,
I believe you've caught a typo on my part that made it past my proof-reader! Its too late now to obviously correct. The last line should read: There is no law except the is
no no law and that is what is fundamental. There ought to be a double negative in the penultimate sentence. Essentially I'm saying that there cannot be a world without a law of some kind. Thanks for catching this, by the way.
Best,
Mozibur Ullah
Francesco D'Isa replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 22:19 GMT
Now I get it! You are very welcome!
report post as inappropriate
Armin Nikkhah Shirazi wrote on Feb. 5, 2018 @ 22:17 GMT
Dear Mozibur,
What a refreshing approach! You did an excellent job emulating Plato while keeping the dialogue interesting and entertaining. I think it is an ingenious idea to clothe some modern concepts related to fundamentality in ancient Greek clothes, and the execution was flawless.
The central idea reminds me strongly of that in Stefan Weckbach's essay, and also a little in Olaf Dreyer's. However, you add an additional contextual commentary, not by stating it outright anywhere but by demonstrating it, in a manner usually associated with the literary arts: our understanding of fundamentality has evidently not sufficiently advanced over the last two and a half millenia that a discussion about it today could not have been conducted by the ancient Greeks. And this raises the obvious question: is that due to the inherent nature of fundamentality, or is it due to our lack of progress in this area?
Outstanding job!
My essay also has a strongly philosophical underpinning: usually we associate the subject of interpretation of a theory with quantum mechanics, but I believe, and try to demonstrate, that actually even something elementary taught in freshman physics, Length contraction (and in the second paper, time dilation) admit of more fundamental interpretations which yield new insights with genuine physics content.
All the best to you, and I hope you write more dialogues!
Armin
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 20:41 GMT
Dear Armin,
Thank you for your generous comments! I tried hard to emulate the style of the original dialogues and I'm glad to see that work paid off. I enjoyed working on it and I am contemplating writing another dialogue on cosmology for the fun of it.
I'll definitely check out your essay.
Best regards
Mozibur Ullah
corciovei silviu wrote on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 22:27 GMT
Nice writing, it was like a delightful dessert served for free. Thank you, indeed
Silviu
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 12:00 GMT
You're welcome. It was meant to be an enjoyable essay to read - short & sweet to carry on with your dessert analogy!
Member Tejinder Pal Singh wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 02:26 GMT
Dear Mozibur,
Compliments on a beautiful essay! :-)
Tejinder
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 12:02 GMT
Dear Tejinder, Thank you for your kind remark. Much appreciated! - Mozibur
Jouko Harri Tiainen wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 03:28 GMT
I have to say this is a beautiful essay -- showing that our 2-1/2 thousand year ideas can still be cast using the Ancient Greeks philosophical ideas. I was wondering about the last line but reading the above comments cleared up my confusions. Yes maybe we need a new clearing out of the old ideas which don't seem to change over the millennia.
Thoughtful, insightful and delightful to read. I have rated your essay highly. Thank you for entering the essay competition.
If you have time my essay
What is fundamental is the area of the imaginary unit" uses a different basic idea of what a geometric number is -- instead of a number being a length such as 3 meters long, we start with a number is a (square) area... which doesn't sound like a big change but it does have profound implications for qm and relativity.
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 11:49 GMT
Dear Jouko Harri Tiainen,
Thank you for your perceptive comments, they were much appreciated. I'll definitely check out your essay. I don't think it is appreciated enough that QM is the first physical theory that makes fundamental use of the imaginary.
Best Wishes
Mozibur Ullah
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 11:58 GMT
For some reason the site strips out line breaks on posts for which I apologise.
Narendra Nath wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 04:47 GMT
The essay has been put in a dialogue format between three Greek thinkers if i may say so. It is just one old culture that preceeded christianity in the west. There are other ancient cultures that have originated on the Indian sub continent. Ancient Hinduism which were postulated through annonymous authorship of saints like Patanjali and his predecessors, Buddha and later on by several reformists...
view entire post
The essay has been put in a dialogue format between three Greek thinkers if i may say so. It is just one old culture that preceeded christianity in the west. There are other ancient cultures that have originated on the Indian sub continent. Ancient Hinduism which were postulated through annonymous authorship of saints like Patanjali and his predecessors, Buddha and later on by several reformists like Swami Vivekananda through famous Chicago International meet of 1890's and so on!There are lot of Zen literature which originated in Japan and China as reformist Buddism. May isay that Mulims too had orginated a philosophy oflife and living through Mohammad who was being persecuted by the Jewish majority in Jerusulum, Palistain. History of religious philosophy has such exemplenary expositions that are still being debated widely. Some of these are taking an ugly turn as terrorism today around the world over. Who is suffering, is it not the goodness of Humanity at large. I may have my personal preferences but these do not matter. What matters are the tenents of love, compassion and good will among the comity of nations that grew up in the world due to geographical, food and climatic reasons.
I went through the essay text presented in a unique manner but it did not convince me about the ingredients needed to day to control turmoil terrorist and other related violence around , mostly killing innocent human beings and not the propagaters! Let us work out the sanity to strengthen the entire humanity and in any isolated manner. Philosophers like Socrates are in history and not that much in relevance today, if i am permitted to say. Weare not running a lecture class on philosophy. WE are dealing with human lives where poverty and hunger still dominate , along with affluence of wealth and power of technology of richer countries. Humanities exist all over the world together and no longer isolated in regions as in the past. One world has to exist today and oneness has to be brought in through insight and strugle and ot by singing songs of good philsophy of the apst in history! I do not mean any personal criticism here as all authors and the public at large are forming the Community of this essay competition. Let love prevail!
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 11:56 GMT
Dear Narendra Nath
For sure. Love & compassion are fundamental to the world. And of course there are many other interesting discussions of ancient cosmologies that still have something to teach us. For example, the ancient Buddhist discussions of atomism. However discussing this would have taken me further away from the subject matter of the essay. I did at one point contemplate moving the discussion from law to justice and to the good as in the traditional discussion of the forms in Platos dialogues but the page count and the time frame was too short.
Best Wishes
Mozibur Rahman Ullah
Narendra Nath replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 14:20 GMT
Well, i can understand your limitations in the text of the essay. But now in the discussions, you can pu tan addendum while explaining your theory, as desired in my query comment above!
report post as inappropriate
Andrew Beckwith wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 15:13 GMT
quote
Theaetetus: Nature is a geometer and she loves to geometrise.
Polydorus: You say that because you are a geometer and you see everything geometrically. I do not
see geometry speaking but a geometer.
end of quote
This, is actually the best line of your essay, i.e. that nature and physics is geometry
Is this what YOU think?
You can see what I did, in my essay December 21st, about the cosmological constant, where in fact what I was doing is actually ALSO linked to geometry
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 20:58 GMT
Dear Andrew Beckwith
Funnily enough I was thinking about this earlier today. Theaetatus here is elaborating the Pythagorean doctrine and I have Polydorus countering that he is saying this because he is a geometer. I'd liked him to go on and say, were you a painter then you would say that Nature is an artist and paints the world in many colours. Phenomenology is an attitude towards the world that takes qualia as fundamental too. Its centered on the human perspective and I think that this is fundamental too. My own perspective is that ontology is multi-faceted and pluralist, so an aspect of nature is geometry, number and neccesity but another aspect is qualia and freedom.
Best Wishes
Mozibur Ullah
Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 16:29 GMT
Mozibur,
Great job, nicely conceived and written, fun to read, and got to the nub of the topic. (I picked up the no no law).
Do yo agree the simple fundamentality of 'change' implies a simpler law of 'motion', so with no motion nothing can exist? If so you may like my essay which finds great value in that, at a SUB atomic scale, closely examining your simple sphere are spherical motion. Very different to yours but I hope showing it's surprising worth.
As also an architect and geometer I liked your approach on those but mostly; "They say, whence comes change? For change is all around us." And could there BE any 'around us' without 'change'?!
Well done,
Peter
Peter
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 21:05 GMT
Dear Peter,
Thanks very much for your kind comments. I shall look up your esay and if I have anything worth saying will comment on it.
The notion that physics is the study of change and that motion is the primary sense of change is something that I took from Aristotle. He begins his book with a discussion of this, for example:
>And because everything which has matter is mobile, it follows that mobile being is the subject of natural philosophy. For natural philosophy is about natural things, and natural things are those whose principle is nature. But nature is a principle of motion and rest in that in which it is. Therefore natural science deals with those things which have in them a principle of motion.
I find it interesting, given how closely tied Physics today is tied with mathematics, that in Ancient Greece, in Athens and earlier in Miletus, physics was discussed qualitatively.
Best Wishes
Mozibur Ullah
Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 14, 2018 @ 02:50 GMT
Hi Dr Mozibur Rahman Ullah
Yes you are correct ...at the time of "Socrates, Theaetetus and Polydorus" atom is the most fundamental." Now.....
I hope you will not mind that I am not following main stream physics...
By the way…Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed...……..….. yours is very nice essay best wishes …. I highly appreciate hope your essay...
view entire post
Hi Dr Mozibur Rahman Ullah
Yes you are correct ...at the time of "Socrates, Theaetetus and Polydorus" atom is the most fundamental." Now.....
I hope you will not mind that I am not following main stream physics...
By the way…Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed...……..….. yours is very nice essay best wishes …. I highly appreciate hope your essay ….You may please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance
Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :-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 GR on any condition
-No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models
-No many mini Bigbangs
-No Missing Mass / Dark matter
-No Dark energy
-No Bigbang generated CMB detected
-No Multi-verses
Here:
-Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies
-Newton’s Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way
-All bodies dynamically moving
-All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium
-Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe
-Single Universe no baby universes
-Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only
-Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..
-UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass
-Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step
-Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering
-21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet
-Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy
-Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.
- Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true….Have a look at
http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.h
tml
I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information……..
Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.
In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from “http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ ”
I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you repliedBest
=snp
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 14, 2018 @ 23:07 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Gupta
Thanks very much for comment. I just want to point out that I don't have a doctorate, so calling me doctor is not quite appropriate! I will take a look at yor essay and if I have anything useful to say I will leave a comment.
Best Wishes
Mozibur Ullah
Anonymous wrote on Feb. 15, 2018 @ 01:44 GMT
Hi Mozibur,
A very enjoyable read. I think you may enjoy my website: -www.digitalwavetheory.com- It uses Zeno's denial of motion to explain quantum mechanics. Just look at the first page and you will get the notion.
From Parmenides: "You will know the aether’s nature, and in the aether all the/ signs, and the unseen works of the pure torch/ of the brilliant sun, and from whence they came to be,/ and you will learn the wandering works of the round-eyed moon/ and its nature, and you will know too the surrounding heaven,/ both whence it grew and how Necessity directing it bound it/ to furnish the limits of the stars."
You presented a very fundamental dialog! Although I wonder if the Greeks had the sense of humor you presented.
Thanks,
Don Limuti
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 20:18 GMT
Dear Don Limuti,
Thank you very much for your kind comments, they were much appreciated. I think every people have a sense of humour, even the Germans who proverbially don't! Socrates was known for his sense of irony and so I felt a touch of humour in the dialogue would be appropriate - besides it was fun - and I felt that it made it more appealing. One commenter said, it put the fun back into fundamental, which was a good joke.
What a wonderful web-site. I'm envious. Its a wonderful resource for those curious about physics at a high level. Its great that you got an endorsement from Barry Mazur too. I haven't read his book on Zeno, but I will at some point.
I particularly enjoyed your discussion of infinities in mathematics/physics and the arrow of time. Quite recently I was discussing the first with a mathematician and it came as a surprise to me how difficult it was for him to contemplate physics doesn't endorse infinities as easily as mathematics. I was reminded of a story in one of Feynmans books where he pointed out to some mathematician friends that physics wouldn't endorse the Banach-Tarski pardox - infinite divisibility doesn't hold.
As for the discussion of the arrow of time you might be interested to know that I came across a book by Bernard D'Espagnat recently, called Philosophy & Physics, where he asked the question whether the collapse postulate in QM gave an arrow of time. This was refreshing as the same thought had struck me but I hadn't come across a discussion of it. I was pleased to see you had referred to John Baez, I found his series of blogs quite wonderful in the way it explained the mysteries of what people were up to in quantum gravity. In fact it inspired me to go and get a masters in the subject.
I also liked the photograph of the baby elephant in a hole. It seems to me that humour is fundamental, even and especially when we do physics...! Tutti Fantastico!
Best Wishes
Mozibur Ullah
Steve Dufourny wrote on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 15:44 GMT
Hello from Belgium,
I loved lol logic I work about my theory of spherisation with quantupm and cosmological sphères Inside the universal sphere in optimisation of mater energy due to encdings of evolution, beautiful philosophical essay Mr Ullah, congratulations, they turn so they are after all :)
report post as inappropriate
Author Mozibur Rahman Ullah replied on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 20:20 GMT
Dear Steve Dufourny
Your theory sounds most intriguing. Thanks also for your kind comments, they were appreciated.
Best Wishes
Mozibur Ullah
Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 19:41 GMT
You are welcome, with pleasure Dear Mozibur Ullah,
My theory of spherisation is very simple in its generality, I consider that particles are 3D psheres and universe also.I try to formalise all this in having invented the spherical geometrical algebras but it is not easy with the vectors and scalars.I have also several hyptheisis and an equation intuitive hypothetical also considering ths dark matter non baryonic, Here is this equation, I don't know if this matter exists but if yes, it becomes relevant E=m(b)c²+m(nb)l² m(nb) is this matter not baryonic and l is the linear velocity of theser particles, I beleive that thie quantum gravitation can be explained with this matter but it is hypothetical still, I must test and experiment also. The spherisation of the universal sphere is in fact an optimisation of this matter energy of this universal sphere with these cosmological and quantum sphères due to encodings of evolution in nuclei.They turn so they are after all ,
I am wishing you all the best in this contest and researchs,
spherically yours
report post as inappropriate
Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 06:24 GMT
Dear Mozibur
If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don’t rate them at all. Infact I haven’t issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to...
view entire post
Dear Mozibur
If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don’t rate them at all. Infact I haven’t issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to gain.
Beyond my essay’s introduction, I place a microscope on the subjects of universal complexity and natural forces. I do so within context that clock operation is driven by Quantum Mechanical forces (atomic and photonic), while clocks also serve measure of General Relativity’s effects (spacetime, time dilation). In this respect clocks can be said to possess a split personality, giving them the distinction that they are simultaneously a study in QM, while GR is a study of clocks. The situation stands whereby we have two fundamental theories of the world, but just one world. And we have a singular device which serves study of both those fundamental theories. Two fundamental theories, but one device? Please join me and my essay in questioning this circumstance?
My essay goes on to identify natural forces in their universal roles, how they motivate the building of and maintaining complex universal structures and processes. When we look at how star fusion processes sit within a “narrow range of sensitivity” that stars are neither led to explode nor collapse under gravity. We think how lucky we are that the universe is just so. We can also count our lucky stars that the fusion process that marks the birth of a star, also leads to an eruption of photons from its surface. And again, how lucky we are! for if they didn’t then gas accumulation wouldn’t be halted and the star would again be led to collapse.
Could a natural organisation principle have been responsible for fine tuning universal systems? Faced with how lucky we appear to have been, shouldn’t we consider this possibility?
For our luck surely didnt run out there, for these photons stream down on earth, liquifying oceans which drive geochemical processes that we “life” are reliant upon. The Earth is made up of elements that possess the chemical potentials that life is entirely dependent upon. Those chemical potentials are not expressed in the absence of water solvency. So again, how amazingly fortunate we are that these chemical potentials exist in the first instance, and additionally within an environment of abundant water solvency such as Earth, able to express these potentials.
My essay is attempt of something audacious. It questions the fundamental nature of the interaction between space and matter Guv = Tuv, and hypothesizes the equality between space curvature and atomic forces is due to common process. Space gives up a potential in exchange for atomic forces in a conversion process, which drives atomic activity. And furthermore, that Baryons only exist because this energy potential of space exists and is available for exploitation. Baryon characteristics and behaviours, complexity of structure and process might then be explained in terms of being evolved and optimised for this purpose and existence. Removing need for so many layers of extraordinary luck to eventuate our own existence. It attempts an interpretation of the above mentioned stellar processes within these terms, but also extends much further. It shines a light on molecular structure that binds matter together, as potentially being an evolved agency that enhances rigidity and therefor persistence of universal system. We then turn a questioning mind towards Earths unlikely geochemical processes, (for which we living things owe so much) and look at its central theme and propensity for molecular rock forming processes. The existence of chemical potentials and their diverse range of molecular bond formation activities? The abundance of water solvent on Earth, for which many geochemical rock forming processes could not be expressed without? The question of a watery Earth? is then implicated as being part of an evolved system that arose for purpose and reason, alongside the same reason and purpose that molecular bonds and chemistry processes arose.
By identifying atomic forces as having their origin in space, we have identified how they perpetually act, and deliver work products. Forces drive clocks and clock activity is shown by GR to dilate. My essay details the principle of force dilation and applies it to a universal mystery. My essay raises the possibility, that nature in possession of a natural energy potential, will spontaneously generate a circumstance of Darwinian emergence. It did so on Earth, and perhaps it did so within a wider scope. We learnt how biology generates intricate structure and complexity, and now we learn how it might explain for intricate structure and complexity within universal physical systems.
To steal a phrase from my essay “A world product of evolved optimization”.
Best of luck for the conclusion of the contest
Kind regards
Steven Andresen
Darwinian Universal Fundamental Origin
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.