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 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.

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger 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

Georgina Woodward: on 8/25/19 at 22:58pm UTC, wrote Hi Anthony, you have briefly explained the fictitious (centrifugal) force....

Georgina Woodward: on 8/24/19 at 23:43pm UTC, wrote What is happening in material reality provides the connection to inertia....

Georgina Woodward: on 8/24/19 at 22:25pm UTC, wrote "We saw early on that as conformed by countless experiment, there is no...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/24/19 at 4:59am UTC, wrote It's difficult for the acrobats to see each other. I want a 3rd party...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/24/19 at 2:50am UTC, wrote Thinking observers are going to notice their own and the other's arms...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/24/19 at 1:42am UTC, wrote The acrobats central to the rotation of a platform, share the same type of...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/23/19 at 21:12pm UTC, wrote Please take a look . This is a significant advance in understanding what is...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/21/19 at 20:06pm UTC, wrote Newton's space and time permit grandfather type paradox and time reversal....


Lorraine Ford: "The idea of a smooth mathematical evolution of “the wave function”, and..." in Consciousness and the...

Georgina Woodward: "Broken machine: What do[es] I see next? The I that was, E.I, has not been..." in The Room in the Elephant:...

Georgina Woodward: "Correction We can choose whether to say that replacement happens when the..." in Consciousness and the...

Lorraine Ford: "Hi Stefan, I hope that a good leader, and a good political party, is..." in The Present State of...

Lorraine Ford: "We live in an age of computing. But physics, mathematics and philosophy,..." in The Present State of...

Georgina Woodward: "I've copied the comment to the thread where it belongs. This orphan can be..." in The Room in the Elephant:...

Georgina Woodward: "Thank you John. What did you think about the questioning whether altitude..." in The Nature of Time

John Cox: "Sorry, Georgina, I have had a busy summer and am racing the change of..." in The Nature of Time

click titles to read articles

Good Vibrations
Microbead 'motor' exploits natural fluctuations for power.

Reconstructing Physics
New photon experiment gives new meta-framework, 'constructor theory,' a boost.

The Quantum Engineer: Q&A with Alexia Auffèves
Experiments seek to use quantum observations as fuel to power mini motors.

The Quantum Clock-Maker Investigating COVID-19, Causality, and the Trouble with AI
Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

Connect the Quantum Dots for a New Kind of Fuel
'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

September 28, 2021

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Bonus Koan: Distant Causes [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Anthony Aguirre wrote on Aug. 17, 2019 @ 16:09 GMT
Another Koan from the cutting-room floor, this one discusses causality and Mach's principle.

Next up will be a brand-new Koan!

attachments: Distant_Causes.pdf

Bookmark and Share

Georgina Woodward wrote on Aug. 18, 2019 @ 04:32 GMT
Some thoughts on the spinning person, stars and arms.

The seen moving stars are not the actual Milky way.They are what is generated by the spinning observer's visual system, from the way in which the 'light' is being received. A local to, observer phenomenon not distant cause. Correlated with the arm movement but not causal.

Imagine the spinning person with siding bar instead of shoulder ball joint, and another such bar connecting wrist to thigh. As he spins the arm will attempt to take the shortest straight line path, tangent to the circular movement, and slide out from the body to the end of the bars.Arms aren't attached like that but just at the top. So the arm, wrist, hand moves out to the furthest it can. Mechanics. Tell me if you disagree.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Georgina Woodward replied on Aug. 18, 2019 @ 10:05 GMT
For linear motion of an observer it is easy to have a co moving observer. Co moving, the pair are stationary relative to each other. Not so easy to have a co moving observer for one who is rotating. However if the pair are acrobats the second could stand on the shoulders of the first and they could rotate together. Staying stationary relative to each other.If central on a rotating platform they can agree they are both standing stationary and the world around is turning.( Though their altered sense of balance and experience of the world would make them also think they are spinning.-Never-mind) Approx. position on the platform and position relative to each other is staying the same. So there is the "they're spinning" viewpoint of observers outside of the spinning system, and the "we're stationary" viewpoint of the spinning system components. Best I can do right now.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Aug. 18, 2019 @ 11:23 GMT
Easier than that- there could just be a co moving person standing looking at the first on the platform. They still form a spinning system with parts stationary relative to each other. I don't know why I thought of acrobats first. Maybe I've missed the point.

Anthony, Sorry if the questions/puzzles are just meant to be thought provoking and not answered. I liked the paper and puzzles .The replies are well meant ,. Maybe I have misunderstood. I like the way you introduce your koans very much. I like your "Delving a bit deeper, we see that there is seldom a single cause for a given event, and it is helpful to think in terms of “correlations” and “influences" I like that and it ties in with recently posted talks on free will.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Aug. 19, 2019 @ 00:33 GMT
"It would surely be a remarkable coincidence if the inertial frame, in which your arms hung freely, just happened to be the reference frame in which typical stars are at rest, unless there were some interactions between the stars and you that determined your inertial frame." Steven Weinberg (from Anthony Aguirre's pdf Cosmological Koans) I addressed this but not explicitly. The way in which vision works means that what is seen in a reference frame is the product of processing already received EMr input. The arms down posture and arms up of the material observer exists together with his experience of vision. The stars are not affecting the observer but the way in which the EMr is being received is different in the two different scenarios.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford wrote on Aug. 18, 2019 @ 14:01 GMT
FQXi's 6th International Conference was titled: “Mind Matters: Intelligence and Agency in the Physical World”

Anthony Aguirre, in effect, says that climate change was not caused by people; people can’t cause anything to happen; people don’t have agency.

Anthony Aguirre, in effect, says that climate change was caused by chains of events: chains of events give people the delusion that they themselves are causing outcomes to happen; chains of events give people the delusion that they themselves could contribute to climate change [1].

Do physicists really think that intelligent people will be fooled by this sort of rubbish, the sort of rubbish that says people don’t have genuine agency?

1. “quite internal events and decisions [which] are often the product of chains of causes and conditions that go deeper than we’d like to admit, or generally are aware…All of these notions fit into physics, but it also provides a somewhat different framework for understanding causality”, Distant_Causes.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford wrote on Aug. 18, 2019 @ 23:36 GMT
I apologise for my above intemperate comments. What I should have said is this:

Where physics goes wrong:

No one disagrees that it is necessary to represent the nature of the world with equations/ variables and numbers. Physicist Anthony Aguirre is correct that this way of representing the world leads to chains of events, i.e. numeric outcomes for the variables that depend on nothing but the equations.

But the equations don’t care about, are completely oblivious to, the wider numeric situations that they cause. Climate change is the equivalent of a wider numeric situation for the variables. Equations do not EVER handle wider numeric situations.

You need “IF…THEN…” algorithms to represent the analysis of wider numeric situations leading to numeric outcomes for the variables. I.e. you need algorithms to represent agency. I.e. it is necessary to represent the nature of the world with algorithms, as well as equations/ variables and numbers.

Mathematics is full of hidden, behind the scenes, simple algorithmic procedures e.g. the delta symbol represents a simple algorithmic procedure. So, it is nothing new to say that we need algorithms to represent the nature of the world.

Where physics goes wrong is that they haven’t noticed that they are already using algorithmic procedures to represent the nature of the world.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward wrote on Aug. 20, 2019 @ 23:49 GMT
Hi Anthony,

Einstein and Newton are using different 'theaters', contexts (for want of better words); Newton, absolute space and time, and Einstein, space-time. Non simultaneity of events in space-time, (Which is non simultaneity of observing the event to have happened, related to signal transmission) can't fairly be used against Newton's model because it isn't set in space-time (is not about signal transmissions) but absolute time applies. Using Newton's time there can be simultaneity of existence. But not communication. Which is outside the scope of his model. IMO the space between bodies is filled not a void, but that space is neither Newton's or Einstein's. That filling makes a single system together with the otherwise separate bodies.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Georgina Woodward replied on Aug. 21, 2019 @ 00:29 GMT
Even with simultaneous existence, using your example, the wiggling cannot be communicated and product be known at the same time as the original wiggling source is originating the signal. Signal transmission delays are not part of Newton's model. Which may be the point you were making.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Aug. 21, 2019 @ 07:21 GMT
The filled space is not space-time as that's the space 'inhabited' by products of EMr processing; seen things. It is not Newton's space stretching across absolute time from eternity to eternity. It is the space between existing material things, matter and fermion particles in a continually changing uni-temporal configuration. That medium, by variation in distribution gives fields and EMr transmission, and is responsible for curvature of 'light' paths around large masses. Curvature of space-time is an effect upon 'mapping' due to the signal delay caused by 'light' path curvature. It is not the cause of 'light' path curvature because the EMr is not travelling through space-time. Space time is the space of observation products not existing reality, independent of observation. That is so because of how vision works.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Aug. 21, 2019 @ 20:06 GMT
Newton's space and time permit grandfather type paradox and time reversal. Space-time permits paradox and time reversal, if it is not recognized that it is where the products of observation are seen or mapped. When regarded in that way the paradoxes either no longer apply or become intuitive,not paradoxical.

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.