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.

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

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

Previous Contests

**Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest**

*December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020*

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

**What Is “Fundamental”**

*October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018*

*Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**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/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

Previous Contests

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

*Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.*

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**Christine Dantas**: *on* 5/19/20 at 8:35am UTC, wrote Dear Cristinel, Thank you very much for your positive review of my essay....

**Cristinel Stoica**: *on* 5/13/20 at 16:27pm UTC, wrote Dear Christine, It was a pleasure to read your essay, it is innovative and...

**Christine Dantas**: *on* 5/9/20 at 10:28am UTC, wrote Thank you, and I wish you good luck in the contest. I hope to read a...

**Michael muteru**: *on* 5/6/20 at 7:19am UTC, wrote hi christian. nice work. like your philosophical work.youve slotted...

**Christine Dantas**: *on* 4/18/20 at 9:55am UTC, wrote Thank you for your comment. If your discovery refutes many of my...

**John Crowell**: *on* 4/8/20 at 17:07pm UTC, wrote Christine I recently revised (added to) my initial essay. So be sure to...

**John Crowell**: *on* 4/8/20 at 17:02pm UTC, wrote Christine I enjoyed your essay and I enjoyed your thinking process. I have...

**Christine Dantas**: *on* 4/3/20 at 17:22pm UTC, wrote Thanks for your comment, it is appreciated. Best wishes!

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**Lorraine Ford**: "(continued) 2. Physics has assumed that bottom-up causation IS top-down..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Lorraine Ford**: "1. Physics can’t tell you why the world ever moves, i.e. physics assumes..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Georgina Woodward**: "Max? Why?"
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Steve Agnew**: "Mueller opens his essay with... "As the argument goes, there are truths..."
*in* Undecidability,...

**Dr Narayan Bhadra**: "All the Honourable Scientists are cordially requested to feedback that we..."
*in* Undecidability,...

**Georgina Woodward**: "The mass of the lion entity is not divided between different areas of high..."
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Jim Snowdon**: "Since evolving on our rapidly rotating planet, we have used it`s rotational..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

**Steve Dufourny**: "a general universal clock of evolution irreversible correlated for me with..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

RECENT ARTICLES

*click titles to read articles*

**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.

**Can Choices Curve Spacetime?**

Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

**The Quantum Engine That Simultaneously Heats and Cools **

Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

**The Quantum Refrigerator**

A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

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.

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

FQXi FORUM

September 19, 2021

CATEGORY:
Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest (2019-2020)
[back]

TOPIC: Metadynamics by Christine Cordula Dantas [refresh]

TOPIC: Metadynamics by Christine Cordula Dantas [refresh]

We present the hypothesis that a physical counterpart to metamathematics can be constructed in a meaningful way, which we term "interpretative metadynamics" or simply "metadynamics". We illustrate this idea by devising a map between logic and ergodic theory, hence suggesting that results in both fields can be fundamentally interrelated. Our mapping implies the existence of peculiar limitations on what can be known in classical and quantum dynamical systems. We suggest a set of ontological arguments, one of which implying that certain limits of provability in formal axiomatic systems correspond, in metadynamics, to an associated physical layer which is not mathematically expressible.

Christine C. Dantas has an undergraduate degree in Data Processing Technology (PUC-RJ/Brazil, 1991), BS in Astronomy (UFRJ/Brazil, 1993), MSc in Astrophysics (INPE/Brazil, 1996) and PhD in Astrophysics (INPE/Brazil, 2001). She is interested in all areas of science and philosophy. Scientific papers can be downloaded at http://arxiv.org/a/dantas_c_1 .

A wonderful paper Christine, very much in line with some of my speculation, in particular taking an approach linking ontology with physical theory, that I completely agree with. When our experimental vices surely end, work in precisely this vein will be the future of a new physics.

Ultimately, in a super-Hilbertian way, we might reach a combined formal language encompassing math, physics and philosophical insight.

I liked this, reminded me of my amalgamated sleuths:

"But this “physical incompleteness” is not just the reflection of a mathematical incompleteness for describing a physical law, but the realization of physical laws that cannot be described mathematically."

Best

Jack

report post as inappropriate

Ultimately, in a super-Hilbertian way, we might reach a combined formal language encompassing math, physics and philosophical insight.

I liked this, reminded me of my amalgamated sleuths:

"But this “physical incompleteness” is not just the reflection of a mathematical incompleteness for describing a physical law, but the realization of physical laws that cannot be described mathematically."

Best

Jack

report post as inappropriate

Christine,

there are phenomena (e.g. falling apples) and physical theories (e.g. Newton's laws) which according to Gödel are "in HARMONY" with one another. In 1.) you say "The human mind has the ability to disclose intricate mathematical structures, and to use them for DESCRIBING, with a high degree of agreement, the physical world." Then, however, you continue saying that it is not clear why nature follows mathematical laws, which puts in question the assertion that mathematical structures DESCRIBE the physical world. And indeed, nowhere in the philosophy of science you will find clarification what exactly DESCRIPTION is or means. While traditionally the term is associated with reductionism, your essay tries to apply it in the other direction, i.e. emergentism.

But what if Gödel - knowingly or unknowingly - hit the nail on the head? Could that mysterious relation between nature (the real world) and math simply be HARMONY or, as I call it, orthogonality or Absolute non-falseness?

Heinz

report post as inappropriate

there are phenomena (e.g. falling apples) and physical theories (e.g. Newton's laws) which according to Gödel are "in HARMONY" with one another. In 1.) you say "The human mind has the ability to disclose intricate mathematical structures, and to use them for DESCRIBING, with a high degree of agreement, the physical world." Then, however, you continue saying that it is not clear why nature follows mathematical laws, which puts in question the assertion that mathematical structures DESCRIBE the physical world. And indeed, nowhere in the philosophy of science you will find clarification what exactly DESCRIPTION is or means. While traditionally the term is associated with reductionism, your essay tries to apply it in the other direction, i.e. emergentism.

But what if Gödel - knowingly or unknowingly - hit the nail on the head? Could that mysterious relation between nature (the real world) and math simply be HARMONY or, as I call it, orthogonality or Absolute non-falseness?

Heinz

report post as inappropriate

"Here, "initial conditions" are understood as the initial (Big Bang) singularity, which we expect to be resolved by a quantum gravity theory ..." (p. 7, "Metadynamics). Is something seriously wrong with Big Bang cosmology? Please google "louis marmet physics".

I conjecture that the following is a work of genius:

Pipino, Giuseppe. "Evidences for Varying Speed of Light with Time." Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation and Cosmology 5, no. 2 (2019): 395-411

Am I wrong? I predict that the Big Bang shall soon be replaced by Wolfram's Reset.

report post as inappropriate

I conjecture that the following is a work of genius:

Pipino, Giuseppe. "Evidences for Varying Speed of Light with Time." Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation and Cosmology 5, no. 2 (2019): 395-411

Am I wrong? I predict that the Big Bang shall soon be replaced by Wolfram's Reset.

report post as inappropriate

Thank you for your inspiring ideas Christine.

I like the broad views of your thinking, maybe you like mine too.

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3411

good luck in the cotest

Wilhelmus de Wilde

report post as inappropriate

I like the broad views of your thinking, maybe you like mine too.

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3411

good luck in the cotest

Wilhelmus de Wilde

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christine,

your notion of 'metadynamics' is an intriguing one. The correspondence between logic, physical systems, and computer programs has been remarked upon before, perhaps most well-worked out in Baez' 'Rosetta Stone'-paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/0903.03409), where he proposes a categorical equivalence between Feynman diagrams, cobordisms, proofs in logic, and computer programs. However, I do not recall any attempt, in that paper, to fold the correspondence back in on itself---to find an equivalent to logic talking about itself within Feynman diagrams, for instance.

I also like your idea that one might get physical laws out of metadynamics---as fixed points, perhaps, of dynamics applied to dynamics, maybe in a way similar to how Löb's theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%B6b%27s_theorem) can be used to construct modal fixed points, the most famous of which is the Gödel statement itself, equivalent (in this fixed-point sense) to the inconsistency of arithmetic.

However, I believe the correspondence is usually drawn a bit differently from the way you frame it---one takes the axioms to be something like the initial state of the system (sort of like the input into a program), then proofs as parallel to the dynamics (the computation), with theorems (truths) coming out at the end (final states). This then leads to something like my proposal, in which what 'comes out at the end' may be subject to undecidability---thus leading to the unpredictability of measurement outcomes, as in quantum mechanics.

Anyway, thanks for an enjoyable essay. I wish you the best of luck in this contest!

Cheers

Jochen

report post as inappropriate

your notion of 'metadynamics' is an intriguing one. The correspondence between logic, physical systems, and computer programs has been remarked upon before, perhaps most well-worked out in Baez' 'Rosetta Stone'-paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/0903.03409), where he proposes a categorical equivalence between Feynman diagrams, cobordisms, proofs in logic, and computer programs. However, I do not recall any attempt, in that paper, to fold the correspondence back in on itself---to find an equivalent to logic talking about itself within Feynman diagrams, for instance.

I also like your idea that one might get physical laws out of metadynamics---as fixed points, perhaps, of dynamics applied to dynamics, maybe in a way similar to how Löb's theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%B6b%27s_theorem) can be used to construct modal fixed points, the most famous of which is the Gödel statement itself, equivalent (in this fixed-point sense) to the inconsistency of arithmetic.

However, I believe the correspondence is usually drawn a bit differently from the way you frame it---one takes the axioms to be something like the initial state of the system (sort of like the input into a program), then proofs as parallel to the dynamics (the computation), with theorems (truths) coming out at the end (final states). This then leads to something like my proposal, in which what 'comes out at the end' may be subject to undecidability---thus leading to the unpredictability of measurement outcomes, as in quantum mechanics.

Anyway, thanks for an enjoyable essay. I wish you the best of luck in this contest!

Cheers

Jochen

report post as inappropriate

Dr Dantas,

Very nice work on Metamathematics and metadynamics…

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability are very much undesirable properties and out-comes of any theory. That theory might have developed by a very reputed person or by a group of well-educated and knowledgeable persons. There is no point of poring resources, money and highly educated man power into that theory when that theory is failing on above three points.

In my essay just elaborated what should be the freedom available to an author when the “ real open thinking” is supported. Have a look at my essay please.

“A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory’s Philosophy”

=snp.gupta

report post as inappropriate

Very nice work on Metamathematics and metadynamics…

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability are very much undesirable properties and out-comes of any theory. That theory might have developed by a very reputed person or by a group of well-educated and knowledgeable persons. There is no point of poring resources, money and highly educated man power into that theory when that theory is failing on above three points.

In my essay just elaborated what should be the freedom available to an author when the “ real open thinking” is supported. Have a look at my essay please.

“A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory’s Philosophy”

=snp.gupta

report post as inappropriate

Hi,

If you are replying any of comments I posted on your essay, I request you to post a copy or intimation that you posted reply, on my essay

“A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory’s Philosophy”

also,so that I can continue discussion….

Best Regards

=snp.gupta

report post as inappropriate

If you are replying any of comments I posted on your essay, I request you to post a copy or intimation that you posted reply, on my essay

“A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory’s Philosophy”

also,so that I can continue discussion….

Best Regards

=snp.gupta

report post as inappropriate

Hi Christine,

(Another) wonderful essay of yours, both well-written and interesting! I wish you good luck :)

Sabine

report post as inappropriate

(Another) wonderful essay of yours, both well-written and interesting! I wish you good luck :)

Sabine

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christine (if I may),

thanks for a well-written and very interesting essay. The ideas on metadynamics you expounded are quite inspiring.

I would be most interest if you could find some similarities with your ideas in the general framework I propose in my essay.

Meanwhile, congrats and good luck with the contest.

best,

Flavio

report post as inappropriate

thanks for a well-written and very interesting essay. The ideas on metadynamics you expounded are quite inspiring.

I would be most interest if you could find some similarities with your ideas in the general framework I propose in my essay.

Meanwhile, congrats and good luck with the contest.

best,

Flavio

report post as inappropriate

Hi Christine,

you developed some deep ideas about the 3 "Uns" and I think your ideas are more than analogies.

You wrote

"Hence the limits of provability in formal axiomatic systems would correspond in metadynamics to an associated layer of physical reality which is not mathematically expressible".

I come to the same inference in my essay. Although some would think this is the end of any proper description of reality, i would think it must not - to the contrary.

report post as inappropriate

you developed some deep ideas about the 3 "Uns" and I think your ideas are more than analogies.

You wrote

"Hence the limits of provability in formal axiomatic systems would correspond in metadynamics to an associated layer of physical reality which is not mathematically expressible".

I come to the same inference in my essay. Although some would think this is the end of any proper description of reality, i would think it must not - to the contrary.

report post as inappropriate

Hello Dr Dantas,

Very relevant general analysis and innovative extrapolation. I liked your metadynamics like a conceptual space of physical attributes that are self-referential, and symmetries related to these attributes lead to laws.

I see so many convergences with the topological spaces, euclidian spaces,and lie Groups and derivatives more the 3D spheres if they are the foundamental mathematical and physical objects of course but I cannot affirm. The points of geometrodynamics or the strings can maybe be conjectured if you analyse deeper the goentrizations and topologies more the rankings of fields and matters. The maths and this metadynamics seem relevant for our physics if they are well harmonised with our pure determinism. Very relevant essay, one of my favorites, you are innovative and it is essential, I wish you all the best in this Contest.

Best Regards

report post as inappropriate

Very relevant general analysis and innovative extrapolation. I liked your metadynamics like a conceptual space of physical attributes that are self-referential, and symmetries related to these attributes lead to laws.

I see so many convergences with the topological spaces, euclidian spaces,and lie Groups and derivatives more the 3D spheres if they are the foundamental mathematical and physical objects of course but I cannot affirm. The points of geometrodynamics or the strings can maybe be conjectured if you analyse deeper the goentrizations and topologies more the rankings of fields and matters. The maths and this metadynamics seem relevant for our physics if they are well harmonised with our pure determinism. Very relevant essay, one of my favorites, you are innovative and it is essential, I wish you all the best in this Contest.

Best Regards

report post as inappropriate

Christine I enjoyed your essay and I enjoyed your thinking process. I have a “recent discovery” that you may want to use to adjust your hypothesis. This “discovery” is introduced in my essay—Clarification of Physics—-. What it introduces is a new Successful Self Creation theory and a new “lowest level of creation”. In reading your essay I was struck by how this lowest level is your ...associated layer of physical reality which is not mathematically expressible.—and the — (yet to be uncovered) extension of logical systems”. However, in my essay appendix, I show that this level is mathematically expressible. It is the lowest level that initially associates physical reality and mathematics. This association carries through its scale up to become the mathematical/universe that I discovered. This lowest level is also the lowest level that “associates” math, physics, the rest of science, philosophy - logic and reason, and religion.

This discovery refutes many of your conclusions. However, the inclusion of this discovery in your excellent thinking about meta- correlations should lead to results that “mirrow ? this is a new term for me” the actual creation of the mathematical-physical universe. It can also be extended to the other disciplines -philosophy etc. I hope you read my essay and comment. If you have any questions, put them in your comments or e mail me. John Crowell

report post as inappropriate

This discovery refutes many of your conclusions. However, the inclusion of this discovery in your excellent thinking about meta- correlations should lead to results that “mirrow ? this is a new term for me” the actual creation of the mathematical-physical universe. It can also be extended to the other disciplines -philosophy etc. I hope you read my essay and comment. If you have any questions, put them in your comments or e mail me. John Crowell

report post as inappropriate

Christine I recently revised (added to) my initial essay. So be sure to read and comment on the current essay. John

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

hi christian. nice work. like your philosophical work.youve slotted something on the human brain.great art piece.you have my high ratei did something on anthropocentric bias here https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3525 please read/rate.all the best in the contest.

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Christine,

It was a pleasure to read your essay, it is innovative and with brilliant ideas. I like your idea of metadynamics, and I think it has an important foundational and philosophical potential. I particularly liked this:

*We can prove the impossibility of proving something!*.

Your

*Proposition. We cannot deduce all the physical laws from the initial conditions of the Universe.*

and your remark that

*this "physical incompleteness" is not just the reflection of a mathematical incompleteness for describing a physical law, but the realization of physical laws that cannot be described mathematically*

are thought provoking. I've seen several attempts to get out of the box of mathematics or the physical law itself, but they usually are very vague, while I think yours is by far more concrete and of better potential, by the combination of ergodic theory with no-go results like Gödel's. Although I hope we are not limited to know the physical laws, on the other hand I am a bit mysterian, so this wouldn't mind me that much :-)

Thank you for the great reading, and success with the contest!

Cheers,

Cristi

report post as inappropriate

It was a pleasure to read your essay, it is innovative and with brilliant ideas. I like your idea of metadynamics, and I think it has an important foundational and philosophical potential. I particularly liked this:

Your

and your remark that

are thought provoking. I've seen several attempts to get out of the box of mathematics or the physical law itself, but they usually are very vague, while I think yours is by far more concrete and of better potential, by the combination of ergodic theory with no-go results like Gödel's. Although I hope we are not limited to know the physical laws, on the other hand I am a bit mysterian, so this wouldn't mind me that much :-)

Thank you for the great reading, and success with the contest!

Cheers,

Cristi

report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.