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.
Can We Feel What It’s Like to Be Quantum?
Underground experiments in the heart of the Italian mountains are testing the links between consciousness and collapse theories of quantum physics.
Blogger Roger Penrose wrote on Jul. 3, 2020 @ 11:42 GMT
Abstract: A common scientific view is that the actions of a human brain could, in principle, be simulated by appropriate computation, and even that it may not be too far into the future before computers become so powerful that they will be able to exceed the mental capabilities of any human being. However, by using examples from chess and mathematics, I argue, that the quality of conscious understanding is something essentially distinct from computation. Nevertheless, I maintain that the action of a conscious brain is the product of physical laws, whence consciousness itself must result from physical processes of some kind. Yet physical actions, over a huge range, can be simulated very precisely by computational techniques, as is exemplified by the LIGO gravitational wave detectors confirming precise calculations, within Einstein’s general relativity theory, of signals from black-hole encounters in distant galaxies.
Despite this, I argue that there is a profound gap in our understanding of how Einstein’s theory affects quantum systems, and that there is reason to believe that the events termed “collapse of the wave-function” take place objectively (gravitational OR), in a way that defies computation, yet should be observable in certain experiments. It is argued that each such event is accompanied by a moment of “proto-consciousness”, and that actual consciousness is the result of vast numbers of such events, orchestrated in an appropriate way so as to provide an actual conscious experience (Orch-OR).
Hello Professor Penrose, I love your works, I have thought about this model of consciousness and it is very relevant, I have my own idea , this consciousness is complex and so simple , its origin is that said not easy to consider, I beleive that this consciousness is an important parameter indeed and its potential can permit to solve many things when the encodings, rational and universal are a reality. I have also studied your models about the twistors, you are very relevant, I have a model about the spheres and the spherisation, an optimisation evolution of the universal sphere or future sphere with quantum 3D spheres and cosmological 3D spheres and I have a model explaining this quantum gravitation, I have thought beyond the box if I can say. I work also about this global project to unite the thinkers and create a manifest of solutions to convice this UN with sciences and consciousness, alone I cannot do it I need help. Congratulations and thanks for all the works that you have given to this planet, I don t want to be too much , but I like your ideas a lot, Best Regards
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 5, 2020 @ 09:27 GMT
It seems so difficult to encricle really the origin of this consciousness, we arrive at big philosophical questions, the sciences community is divided about a the origin, several consider that we are an accident mathematical, others beleive in a kind of creator, like an infinite eternal consciousness creating a physicality with informations sent. I have my own philosophical idea but it is too far of our understanding, in the past I considered that this consciousness ius an emergent property due to evolution of brain, now I consider that all is a fractal of consciousness at its level, like a portoconsciousness also in your ideas, we can so rank it, the coputation that said is not easy , must we mimate the number of synaps and interactions and the same kind of systems, I don t know, the BHs and the informations have something to do in all this about the recyclings and actions of informations and the sortings, superimposings and synchronisations probably. I liked how you see this computation and the interactions between these informations, maybe the quantum computing is essential to have a kind of convergence with the biology also.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 5, 2020 @ 20:13 GMT
to be frank, I d be very honored to find a mentor like you or Connes , I need to learn more and publish correctly the publications, I work about them in maths and physics , I learn all days things that I didn t know, I evolve, I am not a professional, I was at university in geology in belgium but I have stopped in second due to a coma due to an epileptic crisis of high bad, so I have made after 1 year the agronomy and I love the ecology and horticulture ,I create a nursery here for plants in Finland with Ulla Mattfolk, I love to multiplicate the plants, I have immigrated 11 months ago, but I cannot stop to improve my theory of spherisation, this optinisation evolution of the universal sphere or future sphere with quantum 3D coded spheres and cosmological spheres, I have several models about the consciousness, the philosophy of my theory, the quantum gravitation that I have reached also. I found this theory in ranking a little bit of all, animals, vegetals,minerals,maths, physics, chemistry...and one day I have had this humble eureka in seeing the evolution of hominids brains in a page of biology, we see a relative spherisation if I can say since the lemurians, lol it is just a page , I told me oh my god the universe is probably a sphere and the particles also,I need to learn more and well, I have learnt a little bit also your different works and I like them, you are relevant I must say. The proto conciousness seems very intriguing,I consider than we come from a kind of eternal infinite consciousness that we cannot define, this thing creates a physicality and so all is a fractal of consciousness at its levels in function of numbers and particles and complexifications of evolution biological probably, but it is complex to really encircle this origin and how emerges this fascinating consciousness, best regards
A dualist will say that the mind is not material, a physicalist will say there is not really a mind just a brain machine. Only a radical panpsychist might consider an homunculus a possibility because in panpsychism matter=mind.
A relatively massive particle homunculus would be conscious with free will because the universe is conscious with free will and the particle inherited it. Basically...
A dualist will say that the mind is not material, a physicalist will say there is not really a mind just a brain machine. Only a radical panpsychist might consider an homunculus a possibility because in panpsychism matter=mind.
A relatively massive particle homunculus would be conscious with free will because the universe is conscious with free will and the particle inherited it. Basically the particle is a child of the conscious universe that takes billions or trillions of years to mature into a new universe.
A particle homunculus would solve the binding problem. The neurons would send/receive the electromagnetic homuncular code by using the microtubules of neurons as antennas to send sense information and receive commands. It is a lot easier to believe that libertarian free will is in fact real in a quantum coherent homunculus since it is so unified.
If all this is true it would be extraordinarily good news -- the blind will see, the deaf will hear, the lame will walk and even the dead raised! The blind will see and the deaf hear because when the wireless code the brain sends to the homunculus is decoded then all that would be needed to be done is to mount a camera/microphone on glasses that have a chip that converts the images/sounds to the homuncular code and an electromagnetic emitter to send the images/sounds to the homunculus! The lame would walk and the dead can be raised because when we know where the homuculus is and the wireless interface code, a new industry will be possible, the artificial body industry! Simply move the homunculus to an artificial body and power up, the homunculus will receive all the sense information and control the body with its free will! I think the artificial body industry will be the biggest industry and because of mass production available to all! I think eventually artificial bodies will be better than natural bodies and they can be designed for the environment of many planets, moons and the vacuum of space!
You would need to first break the electromagnetic homuncular code to discover the location of the homuculus because then you could send tones or colors to the homunculus with a electromagnetic emitter to quickly triangulate the location.
It is sort of like SETI, but instead of searching for extraterrestrial intelligence by searching radio waves, you are searching for an homunculus by looking for electromagnetic codes associated with sensory input and voluntary actions. Call it, SICH, Search for an Intra-Cranial Homunculus.
The microtubules are good candidates for antennas because they are long, rigid and thin and some researchers like Penrose and Hameroff have already associated them with consciousness.
With SETI, a lot of thought is given to which frequencies to search, with SICH, the job is easier. If microtubules are the main antennas you can search the frequencies the microtubule absorbs and emit for that part of the brain using a spectrum analyzer. You can then use neural net AI to discover codes the microtubules are transmitting or receiving. If the AI can tell what color you are looking at or what tone you are listening to from EM radiation emitted from microtubules alone you may be on your way to cracking the electromagnetic homuncular code!
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 6, 2020 @ 11:34 GMT
Hello Mr Pryor, thanks for sharing your ideas. We know still so few about our potential and this consciousness , we need to know more indeed and find universal truths and tools to improve our technologies. The AI is one step but the consciousness seem an other, with the AI we mimate comportments with rationalsim, but the consciousness seems so complex to mimate, maybe we need to check this quantum computing because we must converge with the universe and maybe that my 3D coded spheres can help if the universe considers these foundamental objects. Why we exist, why we are conscious, why we evolve, what is our origin, what is the main cause, it is still above our understanding but we approach all days, we are still youngs considering the evolution even if we think that we are evolved , we are still so youngs and we know still so few unfortunally, it is a kind of humility to recognise this.The microtubules seem very interesting indeed. Best Regards
The codes I was referring to is the transfer of information by coded streams of photons: electromagnetic radiation -- something that is not currently known to exist in the brain -- not normal neuron to adjacent neuron signalling.
The idea is if the ability of perception of images, sounds and other qualia is intrinsic to high mass particles because they inherited it from the conscious universe and their primary way of sending and receiving information is photons then it follows that they also inherited a decoder/encoder to receive/send images, sounds, and other qualia. That wireless code or language they use to communicate qualia I call the electromagnetic homuncular code.
The brain would need to send/receive a lot of information to/from the particle homunculus from all parts of the brain all at once -- the only way that can be accomplished is by using coded streams of photons using microtubules or other molecules as antennas. The particle can decode these coded streams of photons because it inherited the decoding ability from its universal parent, the conscious universe. The particle can also send out coded streams of photons to the brain for free will voluntary actions and decisions.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 7, 2020 @ 09:51 GMT
It is a very good general analysis, the informations, codes, encodings, decodings seem the secret with our biological evolutive brain and its complexity, it is fascinating I must say like result of evolution, this biology is so complex , I consider also a kind of universal consciousness, but I cannot define it really, I consider that all is a kind of fractal of this infinite eternal consciousness at its level of complexity but it is an assumption of course. The free will and the choices also become relevant but they are so difficult to compute , and maybe that this consciousness also can converge and harmonise these choices in function of our universal foundamentals, it becomes very philosophical even. What are we really and why we exist and think, why we are in evolution also, all these questions merit to be better understood in accepting also our limitations. I am conviced that we must converge with the same mechanism that our universe and the foundamental objects and the main philosophical origin, I consider particles coded mainly and not that all comes from fields like in the strings theory, but what is the real universal partition, I don t know to be frank, it is too much complex for our limited brains at this moment. Your idea about these photons is interesting and about their interactions, exchanges....maybe we must consider new parameters also superimposed to this electromagnetism and this quantum gravitation could help if it is the main chief orchestra considering the main codes , but it is an other story. Could you please explain some details with the electromagnetic homuncular code. it seems relevant if we consider these electromagnetic effects and if we correlate with a depper logic and with the good mathematical partition to reach the main codes at my humble opinion. Best regards
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 7, 2020 @ 09:54 GMT
the brain microtubules become intriguing indeed , maybe we can better understand them in correlation with the cell and how this primitive or simple mechanism acts really , after we can insert a kind of evolutive complexity more the foundamental objets and the consciousness and qyuantum gravitation for a kind of quantum computing even ,gravitation and consciousness become the main keys at my opinion
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 9, 2020 @ 20:03 GMT
What is consciousness if not a field that can store complex experiences in some metaphysical non corporeal way? Why don't we just start with this assumption and see where it leads.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 10, 2020 @ 09:07 GMT
Hi Jason, I consider a kind of infinite eternal consciousness creating this physicality with codes and informations sent , I know that the sciences community is divided about this and that some consider a mathematical accident from a kind of energy and the others consider this creator if I can say like a god of Spinoza, like Einstein said, we cannot prove this and we can just have our own interpretations, for me it seems essential but I respect the other points of vue, we search answers after all, a thing interesting is that the best thinkers had considered this infinite eternal consciousness like einstein, borh, galilei, planck, heisenberg ,newton, Tesla and so more, why they thought about this ? maybe it seems evident to consider.About the metaphysics that said I cannot answer because I consider a pure deteministic way even in thinking about this kind of God, but this consciousness is intriguing when we correlate with this infinite eternal consciousness like if all was a fractal of this, probably that we can have some kinds of connections with this consciousness maybe in meditation or others but it is just for me a kind of serenity of the mind and a kind of correlations with our encodings and brains like if some truths appeared. But all this seems rational and deterministic. Regards
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 10, 2020 @ 18:58 GMT
I remember the words of a wonderful thinker, Schrodinger , he told" the total number of minds in the universe is one,In fact, the consciousness is a singlularity phasing within all beings" he wes general , and relevant I must say , one of my favorites with Planck, Borh, Einstein, Heisenberg, Newton, Maxwell mainly
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 10, 2020 @ 20:16 GMT
can we extrapolate the concept of Entropy to the philosophy and the sociology? yes it is possible with determinism, a society entropical is a society tending to a disorder , so dedicated even to disappear if the universal foundamentals are not correlated and respected towards a kind of respect of hamonies in the interactions, the consciousness become essential to reach the points of equilibrium...
can we extrapolate the concept of Entropy to the philosophy and the sociology? yes it is possible with determinism, a society entropical is a society tending to a disorder , so dedicated even to disappear if the universal foundamentals are not correlated and respected towards a kind of respect of hamonies in the interactions, the consciousness become essential to reach the points of equilibrium and orders. The uncertainty in the theory of informations and the entropy of Shannon can be also correlated like the thermodynamical entropy calculating the disorders of a system , and alwys the transferts of heat and energies of heat towards the cold, that become relevent to go deeper philosophically speaking considering the life and death , the entropy so can be a thing totally deep considering the order and disorder, like if the harmony and order and this disorder danced together and come from main codes created by something that we cannot define , we return so at this infinite eternal consciousness phasing or linked between all minds and even the souls if we consider the continuity. We exchanges simply this energy in a simple resume in specific periods of times , that becomes interesting considering this order during the phasis or links from a pure disorder correlated with a pure infinite consciousness, it is even facinating considering that the harmony appears from a pure disorder, so implying transferts of informations and codes from disorder to order . The continuity and tranfert can be linked with the reproduction and this adn given on a planetary evolutive system but can be also linked with the continuity of our singularities correlated with the main singularity in phasis or link due to this aether to all singular souls in a simplistic resume beyond our human undertanding, this order and disorder is a step simply and the entropy is more than we can imagine , it is liked with this infinite eternal consciousness, if the best past thinkers like heisenberg, plank, einstein, borh, maxwell,lorentz, newton,riemann,fermi,galilei and so more like feynman and others considered this infinite eternal consciousness that we name god, there are reasons with or without the approvements of persons against, nmaybe they know the sciences a little bit but have stopped to go deeper and really understand the transformations matters and energy, they are persuaded but they forget to doubt and go deeper,they don t accept this truth but it is like that with or without their vanity, we are all persuaded lol but a sure thing, this entropy , disorder and order are more than we can imagine. The evolution, the transformations, the order, the disorder are in a harmonical partition specific and it is more than fascinating. Entropically and spherically yours dear friends, we are in a wonderful physicality after all and the word is weak
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 11, 2020 @ 09:44 GMT
I beleive that due to this gravitation, the increasing entropy is a reality due to matters concentrated and this evolution, the stars and BHs are like transformators of E where orders and disorders are in a dance to recycle and create the things, the quantum gravitation also seems essential
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 11, 2020 @ 12:11 GMT
What I find relevant in all humility is that in my model of Spherisation and these 3D spheres, I consider a finite closed universe in evolution, that becomes relevant to link with the theormodynamics and the second law and the increasing entropy more the informations continuing to be sent in an evolutive point of vue from the central main cosmological sphere .
There is indeed a profound gap between gravity relativity and quantum charge. Likewise, there is a profound gap between neural action potentials and free choice. The term consciousness has no accepted meaning and so is simply not that useful for understanding either neural action potentials or free choice.
The term AI is as useless as consciousness since there is no accepted meaning, but of course, the lack of any objective meaning does not prevent discourse. When a computer has free choice, then we can wonder how that could be. Since computers simply do what the master coders want them to do, there is no computer free choice.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 10, 2020 @ 06:12 GMT
AI robots can serve humans best by doing our chores.
Free will is like playing a card game. You have free will with respect to whatever strategy you use to win. Feeling good about winning is what consciousness is all about!
Who cares about charges if you know how to make gravity fields?
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 10, 2020 @ 21:38 GMT
I have always thought that we have not had the visit of aliens due to our immense universe and problems technological to travel inside these galaxies and even between these billions of galaxies, if a civilization is very advanced, so they must check an incredible technology and we d not even see them if they come to study us, if a limited advanced civilization has travelled here , so they have just probably made a quick passage, but the governemnts are not going to tell us due to human stupidities, I beleive that if the aliens come it is not to imply problems because if they travel inside this universe, so their consciousness is very developped and so they don t need energy, water, food, or others like minerals, they just probably study the planets like scientists curious.I am persuaded that we are very numerous inside this universe, and that the combinations animals vegetals are incredible,many planets are less evolved and many are more evolved, it is more than fascinating, at this present they eat, they think, they evolve, they create, this and that, if I could I d visit all these planets , I dream sometines about this, I imagine planets and lifes , the conbinations are infinite in fact when we consider the pressure, the planets and their environments, ....we are not alone it seems logic seen these more than 10000 billions of galaxies, it d be odd to beleive that we are an accident or an exception, the life seems an universal foundamental, Regards
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 10:45 GMT
Hi Steve,
The physics community is misguided. There are no superstrings and no quantum loops. But I think there are expanding gravitons. If the Creator ever decides to turn off the flow of gravitons, the standard model particles fields would vanish, quantum fields would vanish, quantum mechanics would stop working. Existence would cease.
As for aliens, they do seem to exist. I've heard they abduct people and there are rumors of breeding programs. Physicists dismiss these things, but then come up with insane ideas with zero observers. I honestly think I it's more likely that God, ghosts, angels exist, then banging branes and E8 crystals. I really do think that gravitons are expanding spheres.
I think that Biblical stuff can be true even if it's been a rough ride. God still loves us. When people have out of body experiences, they see God. Physicists and skeptics dismiss those legitimate experiences, but are they throwing the baby out with the bath water? I think so.
If the Bible says we have a soul, then maybe it's time to flee the ranks of atheists and ask for God's blessing. Atheists have nothing to offer. They're not even right. Atheists are wrong about the physics, and are lost. It's time to abandon atheism as a mistake, an error in judgement, a testament to to our flawed nature.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 11:58 GMT
Hi Jason, I tell me that indeed these strings or superstrings and others like the geometrodynamics like the E8 also forget to consider the coded particles and this gravitation like main chief orchestr, so I like your idea about these gravitons and the expanding sphere like main codes and origin, I beleive strongly that this gravitation is the main chief orchestra. I consider in my model like you know an infinite eternal consciousness that we name god , I beleive that we need this potential to understand the transformations energy matters but the sciences community is divided, that said, the best thinkers have considered a kind of god of spinoza, maybe when you study the generality this evidence appears logically. We need a kind of coder , I consider a god of spinoza like Eisntein in respecting the pure determinism, I am tolerant that said about the religions even if I found them a little bit lacking of rationalism in their interpretations. A sure thing seems this universal altruism and love like a truth, we are all linked and in the same boat of evolution after all , we evolve quietly and the truths are everywhere around us at all scales, this consciousness is more than fascinating, I consider it like a pure tool of improvement and optimisation, this consciousness evolving seems an important tool to utilise the things around us with wisdom to improve what we can imporve in fact in respectimg these universal laws. Many physicists consider this god of spinoza and others deny it , but a sure thing, we evolve and something codes all this , the informations and particles are more than we can imagine , we know nothing still , we must be humble and accept this truth it seems to me.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 16:47 GMT
My wife and zi are raising two feral kittens; the other night, we fed them pieces of steak. The kittens loved it so much , they seemed to come out of their shell, and become more friendly and playful. It led me to wonder if steak, and meat eating in general, are key to raising big strong babies, both kittens and humans. That led me to consider the possibility that animal sacrifice, like heifers and goats, which is encouraged in Leviticus of the Bible, are actually a way to give those followers of God, in ancient times, an advantage. The God of Spinoza, as near as I can tell, is a clever way of saying "atheism". In contrast, I think the God of the Bible might be the true God that created the universe. But this is a physics forum, so I will elaborate on my expanding graviton theory.
A sphere of radius r = ct, has a surface area of A = 4pi r^2, which is the virtual photon. A virtual photon is configured with physics constants to be a real photon if energy was available to satisfy E=hf. That surface has to contain all the pointing vectors and have electromagnetic waves built into it. The interior of the sphere must be the "history" of the expanding graviton sphere, which is made of quantum states for position, momentum, spin, etc. A graviton literally weighs nothing, unless it is energized. Then, it can have a mass of m=hf/c^2. Those same electromagnetism fields that are built into the expanding surface of a graviton causes it to deform and change shape in the presence of a potential energy as described in the Schrodinger's equation.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 17:45 GMT
I agree that we are not here to speak about the religions, like you know I have read all the sacred books, the bible, the talmud, the coran, hindouism, buddhism----and I must say that the best answers were with the sciences , I have read also kant, spinoza , descartes and others, I beleive like spinoza in an infinite eternal consciousness that we cannot define, and I respect the pure determinism, I am tolerant that said , So I respect your point of vue about the bible, but for me they are just books writen by intelligent persons to decrease the human instincts primitive, they are not the truth for me even if I respect the wonderful message of Jesus, he was for me probably an old soul , the god of spinoza is not atheistic but a god where we respect the pure determinisn and where we recognise our limitations about its meaning, the infinite eternity is beyond our understanding.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 19:54 GMT
You know Jason, this God of Spinoza is a god , it is simply an infinite eternal consciousness creating with determinism this physicality, like an infinite substance that we cannot define , nor you nor me understand this thing, nobody in fact, nor the bible, what is it ? for you ?, for me this thing was probably there since an eternity and this thing was maybe alone and so this thing has created a...
You know Jason, this God of Spinoza is a god , it is simply an infinite eternal consciousness creating with determinism this physicality, like an infinite substance that we cannot define , nor you nor me understand this thing, nobody in fact, nor the bible, what is it ? for you ?, for me this thing was probably there since an eternity and this thing was maybe alone and so this thing has created a physicality in transforming and coding its energy, god does not act with miracles but with an evolutive system and in creating the consciousness, we are its babies and we are there to catalyse and improve what we can improve in respecting the foundamental universal laws, a religious doesn t understand better god or the universal altruistic love you know, they are not going to go in the paradise because they follow the sacred books, they are creations like all.The bible I repeat is just for me a book writen by humans and I like a lot the message of jesus but the humans have all interpreted oddly in the bible. I consider the spheres and the sphere like you know and this spherisation and for me we are youngs and we improve this sphere simply , we are fractals of this infinite eternal consciousness but it is beyond our interpretation, the bible I respect it and the religious but they cannot affirm that they are right, the same for all other ideaologies or philosophies, we know nothing still about this universe and still less about God , an eternal infinite consciousness seems for me evident because we cannot come from nothing but we must doubt and prove our assumptions. God does not tell me these physics, God has created us for me and has given us eyes to observe, a mind to think and probably a soul to continue the road but we don t know how act these things really, we must accept our limitations, the problem with the religious is that they are perauaded due to probably a spiritual euphory but the real answers about god for me are with the sciences, einstein said that god does not play at dices, and I agree with him and about the god of spinoza because it is a god respecting the pure determinism and accepting that we don t know what it is really, nobody has the answer, all what we can is to study these sciences because they are the real language of the nature and these informations and codes. Maybe in a simplistic vue that we c4reate it this thing that the religious name the paradise because all evolves and the souls also probably for me, but I cannot affirm, the same for my theory of spherisation, I cannot affirm these coded 3D sphjeres like foundamental objects, but a sure thing is that I doubt that we come from nothing. The religious I repeat don t encircle better this universal love and altruism , but I am tolerant I respect their choices, hope they respect mine also
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 20:27 GMT
this infinite eternal consciousness does not tell us to make a break in physics, we utilise just our mind, brain and consciousness in observing and trying to prove the physics and laws of our universe with determinism, nobody is in synchornisations with kinds of fields with God, it is esoterism for me and it is not like this that this universe acts for me, but I respect still the choices of thinkers, we are all free to think like we want, it is also the free will , but the consciousness and this determinism seem essential, friendly
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 21:04 GMT
Yeah, but expanding gravitons lead to interstellar travel via gravity field generation. The problem with the Spinoza God is that it doesn't separate this from that, doesn't show us actual technology the way YHWH does. I'm not judging you. I'm just saying, let's invent the interstellar drive!
Homuncular particles can can serve as homunculus to all sorts of bodies and it is only necessary that the particle feels like it is a certain body, not that the particle changes shape. The particle has a minimalist design of a energy/information reserve and a high speed photonic input/output system regardless of whether it is serving as homunculus for a 4 legged creature, a bird, or us.
A homuncular particle has a much higher de Broglie frequency by mc2/h than typical particles and quantum mechanics gradually transitions to libertarian free will at higher frequencies and therefore energy.
The high energy particle also acts like a CPU that converts the electromagnetic homuncular code to qualia and vice versa. It inherited this capability from its universal parent, the conscious universe.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Aug. 11, 2020 @ 10:30 GMT
Respected Professor Penrose sir,
I always read your works and am greatly inspired about that
i think if we intersect philosophy with science,that will produce great results and help to solve mysteries of universe,i think the physical and mathematical aspect of consciousness can be theory of everything!and if we study the states of mind(sub conscious,conscious and like that)and if we intersect it with science then i think it will produce great results!Am i right sir?
Kjetil Hustveit wrote on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 13:36 GMT
Dear Professor Penrose, thank you for sharing your really creative ideas and it was a pleasure seeing you perform. I remain with some questions though - which may only be a result of my limited understanding.
Isn't it to jump conclusions to proclaim that computers will never have the ability for understanding. I do of course agree that contemporary AI is too primitive. But you said that we...
Dear Professor Penrose, thank you for sharing your really creative ideas and it was a pleasure seeing you perform. I remain with some questions though - which may only be a result of my limited understanding.
Isn't it to jump conclusions to proclaim that computers will never have the ability for understanding. I do of course agree that contemporary AI is too primitive. But you said that we don't know or understand what understanding and shouldn't it therefore be wrong to rule out the possibility?
And then you jump to the conclusion that the seed of consciousness is in the inherit randomness in quantum mechanics? Not that it is necessarily wrong, but I feel that it needs stronger argumentation?
I propose that it should be possible to calculate the approximate probability for a self organising system to evolve consciousness. And that one of the really interesting questions is that whether chance plays a central role?
F.ex if one starts with the assumption that the universe consists of some discrete bits information. To get any structure from it there has to be relations between the information bits or chunks. To be able to evolve anything there has to be a way to change the relations. (energy) And to be anything other than noise there probably has to be some very simple rule of causality. Should not chance be a central property all results would be easy to calculate - and very limited. But if we have, causality, relations, chance and change shouldn't it be possible to calculate possible levels of complexity that can evolve? Building something that is conscious is of course just a small subset but it may be interesting to dive into the complexity needed?
Extension:
Throw in that the information has a non zero chance of influenceing each other and we have a universe that starts with noise. By random interactions builds self organising structures. To evolve into really large structures it has to emerge some "error correction" structures - and voila we have a universe complete with physical laws and if large enough and with stable enough error correction is bound to evolve consciousness.
Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 15:22 GMT
How about a refresher?
In Decoherence theory; the wavefunction alone exists and endpoints like particles are ephemeral results of localized observations. The global wavefunction is seen to have components that are local reduce. Philip Pearle introduced the idea of Statevector Reduction with a paper about the 'gambler's ruin' game where at the end, all of the chips are held by one player or the other. This is of course similar to a quantum mechanical collapse where one possibility emerges as fact from a field of many choices.
The theory of Continuous Spontaneous Localization (or CSL) was the next logical step; once researchers realized that gravity could induce decoherence. Seth Lloyd had the insight that systems moved toward being massively entangled, so that a particle in motion becomes merged with the detector, to be detected. And Roger Penrose introduced the idea of Orchestrated Reduction, or Orch-OR, where mutual interaction among target systems produces a single outcome.
This does NOT require the mechanism of microtubules to explain consciousness in living organisms, but Sir Roger is using that analogy to make it plausible, or to show a possible mechanism that is already a part of the biological scaffolding, which can account for quantum-mechanical effects. Cross reference this with Vlatko Vedral's work for more insight. For the record; biological structures in situ have geometrical configurations specific to quantum-mechanical properties, not present in the raw chemicals.
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 15:40 GMT
Just to emphasize...
I have been following this question for a long time. I have a typewritten copy of Phil Pearle's first paper on Statevector Reduction which I obtained after some correspondence on the topic years ago. I also corresponded with Dieter Zeh and Erich Joos about the fine points, after reading some of their published works on decoherence, and having opinions of my own to offer.
This was along the same lines as what Vedral and Lloyd were doing - involving entanglement with target systems becoming global entanglement over time. And this is what I presented at FFP10 in Perth, Australia (A common basis for quantum non-locality and thermodynamical entropy). I hoped to meet Prof. Penrose at FFP11 in Paris, the following year; but he was not able to attend.
But I did get to hear lectures from some other notable experts, including some relevant material on quantum foundations, that year. I have of course continued to research in this area since then. I should mention the work of Paola Zizzi, whose "Big Wow" cosmology involves the idea that the Spontaneous Reduction at the time of decoupling has the same magnitude as the Orchestrated Reduction for a conscious thought in the human brain, according to Penrose.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 16:26 GMT
Hi Jonathan, all this is very interesting. This puzzle of consciousness is complex and fascinating. If I can, I d like to have your general philosophy about the origin of this universe, for me the main energy beyond this physicality without time, space, matters, is an infinite eternal consciousness , so I consider that all is a kind of fractal of consciousness at its level, what is for you this thing transforming the E in matters ? They are deep philosophical questions in fact and it seems foundamental to really encircle thie origin of our physicality and this consciousness also . friendly
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 14, 2020 @ 17:33 GMT
A tall order...
But I am still in the game, trying to explain the things you ask about. I will comment further over time, but I do see awakening and emergence as connected, so that the evolution of the cosmos and of consciousness are intertwined.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 15, 2020 @ 08:53 GMT
Hi Mr Hustveit, we don t know really what is the main cause and what are the foundamental ojects , we have just our own philosophical interpretations and we cannot really reach these unknowns, some think that we come from a mathematical accident from a kind of energy, others consider an infinite eternal consciousness , the same for these foundamental objects, I consider 3D coded spheres, others consider strings inside the photons at this planck scale , others points and a geometrodynamics but in fact nobody has really the answer and it d be odd to affirm to know the truth. so we just discuss in philosophy
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 15, 2020 @ 10:48 GMT
Jonathan, Jason, Mr Hustveit, a thing wich intrigues me is that we must differenciate at my humble opinion the AI , the consciousness and the free will, they can converge but they are different at their levels of studies and algorythms, the free will is complex. For the consciousness we must in logic reach the foundamental objects and the quantum computing, that gives us deep philosophical...
Jonathan, Jason, Mr Hustveit, a thing wich intrigues me is that we must differenciate at my humble opinion the AI , the consciousness and the free will, they can converge but they are different at their levels of studies and algorythms, the free will is complex. For the consciousness we must in logic reach the foundamental objects and the quantum computing, that gives us deep philosophical questions even and responsabilities. The AI is different and is easier to compute because we just mimate the intelligence and so the logic and rationalism and the encodings deterministic of informations, the consciousness that said can be correlated but is a deeper thing. We can for me just create an AI but not a consciousness due to these limitations. If the quantum 3D spheres are the foundamental objects, we could converge with the oscillations of strings and try to reach these main codes and origin of our physicality but it seems so difficult at this moment, we must undertand the real universal partition and all its complexity , and it seems not possible actually. The free will also seems not possible without the consciousness and the real main foundamental objects and fruthermore the human psychology and its encodings also must be taken into account. It seems that this universal determinsinm is the key but not easy to converge due to these limitations. An other thing for the humanity is that this AI is going to arrive quickly on earth and we must change our gloabl economical system because many are going to loose their manual jobs due to this AI , we must find solutions for these jobs, that is why I spoke about my global project to create manual jobs and to catalyse the global economy in considering this industrialisation of our solar system correctly with wheels in space, we can mimate g our gravitation on earth and create ecosystems , that will permit to give jobs to majority if the world bank and UN take its responsabilities to catalyse rationally these 197 governments, it is an obliged step of evolution and all can win , the richest like the poorest, we don t stop the enterprises or societies, we boost them , the win win is essential. This AI can be very relevant added with these manual jobs , the diplomacy, the democracy, the socialism capitalism can be harmonised correctly , we just make a step of evolution. That will permit to give water, food, energy, jobs to majority and that will improve the global psychology in giving hope to all, the ecosystems are essential and on earth also we must improve them and their interactions, a town like New york must consider this harmonised ecology, the walls and streets muts be balanced in symbiosis with the natural ecosystems, even the composting at big global scale is essential, it exists many lifes in a small part of compost and it is the begining of the food chain, theses ecosystems are foundamental and we cannot live without them here on earth and in space, so we must work with this potential.Regards
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 06:06 GMT
Hi Kjetil Hustveit,
You said,
"As for the question from Jason: Explaining cosmos as being created doesn't really contribute to explaining anything - what was it then created from?"
Actually, by presuming design, I can talk about what I think is a fundamental mechanism that causes physics to operate. A good mechanism has to (1) explain what causes the speed of light to be invariant, (2) work in both quantum mechanics and general relativity, (3) should be something that we've already encountered in physics already, but didn't realize what it was, (4) it should explain the mechanism of causality, (5) it should come from the derivation of special relativity, (6) and it should explain the spacetime interval.
Very simply, the mechanism is an expanding graviton. At every point in space, regardless of velocity, there is an expanding graviton that expands from a point. It has radius
It obeys the equation,
When it expands, it can interact with particles to become the wave function psi. When it expands beyond 1 second, it overlaps with other gravitons to become part of the spacetime continuum.
So basically by ignoring the "God created it" hypothesis, you led yourself down blind alleys that accomplished nothing. You wasted your time.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Kjetil Hustveit replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 06:33 GMT
Hi Mr Dufourny, you're absolutely right about that we do not really know. I tend to lean on a reductionist view to try to reach understanding which may be a limitation in some regards. Free will requires probability, without it, there could only be an illusion of free will. No probability would also severely limit complexity in the universe. (I find it quite ironic that some of the biggest companies in the world is of the opinion that if they just get enough data they can calculate and control the world - totally disregarding that it was sheer luck that made them succeed.) It is really intriguing that some part of a sufficiently large and complex self organising system can at some point influence or even control the evolution of local parts of the system. As for consciousness: I think it is a bit overrated - in the sense that it is given to much mythic properties. I guess it can be regarded as a bit complex way of replay stored sensory input and analysing it in a feedback loop as a tool evolved to increase survival rate by being able to plan ahead. It is of course tightly connected to quantum physics, because that is the root of everything we perceive. It may be so deeply connected that we cannot build structures like it ourselves, but that we don't know yet. That said, if someone do develop a general AI it is very important that we have thoroughly prepared an ethical foundation. Put another way - it is not expected that a general AI will treat us humans nicely when we can't do it ourselves. It is also very important that the technology is not owned by one corporation or country. These issues we'll have to collaborate widely to solve. They are absolutely solvable. and if we manage to do this we'll all have a bright and interesting future.
Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 11:59 GMT
Free will requires probability. Yes, it is a result of choices we do, with or without awreness. Most of the information we get is not selected as something important. This gives a probability, which can be Gaussian with a peak? This leads directly to quantum states as a lower dimension with the uncertainty, that describes the same thing. So I think there is not that big difference between quantum and classical states generally. Classical states has more dimension.
Quantum states must be treated as many parallell sheets that can be bent differently, also go through an exchange mechanism and gain energy. We see this often, but we don't describe it in relation to gravitation (not gravity as a well). Gravitation must be differentiated into many aspects too, as DE is created to explain the redshiftings as an 'excess energy' not related to anything we know. This is maybe a rest from BB?
Professor Penrose, I thought about your model , I have studied a little bit the brains , the cortical area and the neurons are fascinating and their evolution and number also like their complexity. The mathematical abstraction seems relevant and these microtubules also but if I can , it could be relevant to consider the real foundamental objects and so the informations in their pure sense, I...
Professor Penrose, I thought about your model , I have studied a little bit the brains , the cortical area and the neurons are fascinating and their evolution and number also like their complexity. The mathematical abstraction seems relevant and these microtubules also but if I can , it could be relevant to consider the real foundamental objects and so the informations in their pure sense, I thought about a kind of gravitational chief orchestra and so a kind of gravitational collapsing even, so the aim being to converge with a kind of quantum computing and so in considering the converging qubits and their properties. My finite series of quantum 3D spheres could help and the geometrical algebras also for the fractalisations of dimensions if I can say. With a specific number for the primordial series,and we consider also the two fuels , photons and cold DM, more the primordial codes, the space, and we consider their motions, oscillations, rotations more other properties. It is a pure mathematical abstraction trying to converge with the univeral objects and so this consciousness in a general analysis. These polymers microtubules become relevant if we consider so these 3D spheres and all the interactions of exchanges for the informations, with sortings, synchros,and superimposings and why, maybe the volumes and densities become relevant but I am not sure. The storage is not easy to encircle and why, how,and where also...The bytes are intriguing in these combinations and numbers considering these microtubules, I beleive strongly that it exists a kind of partition with these 3D spheres and that several mathematical tools can be considered for these partitions like the series in nature,like fibonacci or others, pi, the golden number, ....and so the geometries, topologies, properties, fields, waves, matters, 3D spheres and oscillations, rotations motions become relevant adding the other properties of these 3D spheres. That could permit to better encircle these neurons and the synapses and so the exchanges of informations and encodings.Your idea is relevant about this objective reduction and maybe the works of Godel could help also to link this consciousness, the quantum computing, the consciousness, and this quantum gravitation, this QG for me is essential because I consider that it is the main chief orchestra of this universe this gravitation, I have reached it in all humility in thinking beyond the box. All this to tell that it implies a ranking of frequences of course and the hertz systems but we need to insert also these gravitational quantum fields , and even for me a fith force, we cannot without these unknowns really understand these microtubules with their main codes , we can just actually encircle the surfaces and correlated effects of our electromagnetic forces. We need to insert a deeper logic both for the Quantum computing, and quantunm gravitation and this consciousness, because we need to know the main codes simply. That implies a topological quantum computation very deep and new considering these foundamental mathematical and physicall objects , the 3D spheres instead of strings or points and geometrodynamics, all seems made of particles and not from fields. An universal partition exists and the hamiltonian also consdiering this deeper logic gravitational. These polymers are more than we can imagine and we can find the real secret of outputs, inputs and why, where and how with these 3D spheres , these finite series I have calculated oddly approach the dirac large number. And the combinations become infinite , when these 3 main series merge, they create all in my theory. The computations of informations can appear if we find these real convergences. The main aim being to mimate this universe, this nature and so to have the real qubits converging, we can consider several mathematical tools, the works of lie, bott, poincare, ricci , hilbert.... the real aim is to converge with these foundamental objects. The spherical qubits seem for me the answer. But the complexity of these series and the motions oscillations imply a very difficult road when we consider these main codes, this consciousness, this free will and the intelligence. But we can try in mimating these cosmological spheres and their number finite , because I consider the quantum finite serie correlated and so the hierarchy can appear in considering this number and after we play simply with all the different combinations of interactions to try to reach what we want to reach.A computation could help to try all these combinations of 3D spheres mimating the evolutive brains and these polymers, microtubules.We can consider this cortex, these lobes, this and that and play with all these combinations , but I don t know what we can utilise to mimate this biology, maybe the silicon but I don t know if it lacks something because if this evolution, this biology, this gravitation are important, so we need to superimpose something.The cognitive sciences are complex after all like this psychology even and neurobiology. Philosophically speaking , I have my ideas but I spoke here about the possible general model, not the origin, it is an other story, Best regards
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 08:52 GMT
I think the atheist physics community will destroy all of its knowledge before they accept the simple fact that God created the universe. Atheist arrogance has failed to lead to any new breakthroughs. But the combined ego of atheists will be a detriment more to Western civilization, than it will be to a Creator whom they deny the existence of. The actual mechanism of how physics works is actually pretty easy to explain, but that doesn't get you grants.
When Western civilization crumbles to dust, you better learn how to be a gun slinger or wield a sword. We could have traveled to the stars, but atheist physicists couldn't get past their huge EGO.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 11:00 GMT
Hi Jason, maybe it is the human unconsciousness the problem and we could be more logic, like I explained you, we have invented the arms and weapons, the borders, the money and others and if a kind of infinite eternal consciousness exist , so I beleive strongly that never this thing wanted that we create them....you know a friend told me that your twin brothers are the black people and the native indians.......we live on a planet earth having evolved oddly, and we forget generally our foundamental lwas, we are all brothers and we must live respecting these universal laws,
Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 11:20 GMT
To all:
The very big problem is how we define consciousness. Penrose talk of a proto-consciousness is one step in thre right direction, as well as Damasios hierarchy of consciousness, where he also talks of proto-consciousness, but not in the same meaning as Penrose. Today the problem is that consciousness is defined as A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I or J.... etc. without stating which definition is used. The most common is that awareness, which already is a result of computations, exclusions, what we call informations, is equaled with consciousness. This is so evidently totally WRONG.
Consciousness must be something very small, just as Penrose says it is in Gödelian math. But my guts resist to put it in hidden variables... then we must find how to make it emergent as information.
I also very much like Cristi Stoicas work on this, using Bohm. Must study it more. What is hidden in consciousness? The uncertainty must be something very essential in it.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 12:01 GMT
Hi Ulla, happy to see you on FQXi,
This planet is unfortunally not really harmonised respecting the universal laws, we are after all all brothers and in the same boat, in my country the belgium, the past is sad with Leopold the king who has killed many africans and profitted of them, the same for the sad past in USA , with the indians and black people, and everywhere still on this earth, that continues, many does not accept the differences, the problems aere numerous about the religions, the colors, the ideologies, I don t understand how it is possible in fact, the humans can be very odd , is it a problem of education and encodings ? I don t know, it is probably a lack of consciousness simply. in all case it is very sad, we are all in the same boat, having the same origin and all linked simply, hope we can change for the well of all. We try to explain this conciousness but lol we don t utilise it really, it is paradoxal, the same for my project of global collaboration, many tries to explain it and forget to utilise it , maybe our vanity is so important that the majority prefers to satisfy it instead to utilise this universal consciousness, maybe it is in our adn , us the hominids, we are too much occupied to satisfy our ego instead to act . It is odd, we must change globally if we want to have a rational future, if not we shall destroy all due to this individualism, this difficult global system and this vanity .
Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 21:01 GMT
For Jason,
One of the oldest known poems is from Ancient Egypt called "Hekau" or 'the utterance.' It starts out "Hekau, anuk puuh Khephr naah" which translates to "the utterance is the origin story of Khephra." In this work; it is taught that the body of the Divinity had to arise first, along with Consciousness, before the material world could arise.
This reflects a sensibility more like Paola Zizzi's "Big Wow" where the event which condensed the possibilities (from an initial superposition) in the early universe was the emergence of cosmic consciousness - a big "Wow!" - an awakening. But one could also make a nice analogy with higher Maths, asserting that the sequentially evolutive property of the Octonions had to arise before the universe could be made.
'Was created' or 'did evolve' is somewhat a matter of perspective about the cosmos and not necessarily something completely different. Castaneda talks about the realm of the "pure abstract" and one could argue that consciousness needed to arise there, and that the universe arose from that. This makes sense. What makes it hard is when 'creation' is treated as a dogmatic religious belief.
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 21:22 GMT
In further reply...
I think it is a non-explanation to say "God created it." so I agree with Kjetl. The real question is whether the evolution of the universe was shaped through conscious participation or was in fact automatic. So I ask; do you feel consciousness was necessary to having the universe arise?
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 21:46 GMT
Jonathan, we can tell all what we want , nobody knows the answer, nor you, nor me, nobody, we are limited and about the consciousness in fact it is the same, we don t know why we think and are conscious, and it is different than this intelligence in fact also, in fact we cannot affirm is something has created this physicality or mot and the persons persuaded lack of humility and determinism, so I retrun the question , it is the same in the other sense, do you fell the mathematical accident was necessary to having the universe arise, in fact all our assumptions are just assumptions,
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 21, 2020 @ 18:11 GMT
I look at the standard model, the periodic table, the physics constants, and I think to myself, how did any of this arise in a "one shot" situation, by mistake? Or as a random event without design?
Even the Bible describes God as a Holy Ghost. And ghosts are known to be invisible things that cause things to happen, but evidence of there existence is very difficult to establish. But we live in a universe in which the physics community has established the existence of invisible things like Higgs bosons and virtual particles.
By assuming the existence of an Intelligent Designer (God), I can already come up with a graviton model that uses things that are already established in physics, to create an experiment using things that engineers can already do. I don't need to make up superstrings and quantum loops and E8 crystals which have no basis in physics reality; those things are just for ego gratification and eye candy, they have nothing to do with reality.
I also think that is the meat of the whole observer question. If we are to contemplate AI in relation to what we subscribe as consciousness, then my Grandpa's ethical challenge (Aug 20 @ 18:45 ) is tantamount to quantum entanglement. Does the street 'know' what the mind reveals to itself and of the street, and of itself?
Maybe. I really don't know but spent many years feeling absolutely naked to the world, its astounding once you realize what people compulsively show you without so much as giving a real thought, and how embarrassing it is to feel them eyeballing your own thoughts in response and worry if you are at all correct. Takes a lot of getting used to. But how would that compute? best as always jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 16:46 GMT
John, you try to encircle the human nature you lol ??? and its psychology, wowww good luck, you know dear brother human it is better to contemplate in the fly of a bee on a wonderful fuchsia the hopes of this universe than trying to be a normal human in this society loosing its foundamentals, you have difficulties to adapt you ?or to be understood because you beleive that you are special and encirlce the universal love and the truths of this universe lol we are not special ,make like me, be a humble traveller from stars and improve your consciousness in a relativistic isolation and contemplate the real truths around you instead to try to prove your consciousness, intelligence or others to the others, it is always a question of ego, consciousness and vanity after all, but rhe only one truth is the universal altruism isn t it? laugh is good for health also on this ironical planet ,the fact to encircle that we are all equals and made of the same essence , so don t be frustrated, don t try to impress, don t try to be a better human than the others but try to improve this planet in respecting these said universal laws, have you ideas for my group Global collaboration, you shall be a piece of puzzle when we fight our vanity and work for the globality, be sure it helps to find his place, ps good poem, I write also poems and pieces of theater in french, I play guitar and piano also, the arts are essential like the imagination, they permit to write our hopes on the walls of big towns forgetting the truths :)
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 16:53 GMT
all this to tell in resume, instead to try to explain things that we cannot really explain like this consciousness, it is better to utilise it to improve this planet without vanity and with a pure heart universal and altruist , we are not in a competition of intelligence and consciousness, the vanity is a sad paramter and this consciousness can permit to decrease it :)
Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 21:17 GMT
To Ulla...
Yes the variability and uncertainty are essential. Things must be free to vary and in a state 'yet to be determined,' at some juncture, for free will to be possible. Constructivism teaches that only that which can be constructed is real. The reality of consciousness is realized in making determinations, which is in part pure observation, but is necessarily also an expression of free will, and a construction. So I agree with your main point in reply to my comment.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 17, 2020 @ 21:54 GMT
it is more complex than this , and this consciousness and free will can converge due to encodings foundamental and observations, but we cannot compute them actually , it is different than this intelligence and if thinkers think they can, so they lack of logic because they don t know the real foundamental objects nor this origin of our universe and why we think , they just mimate the microtubules and brains in utilising some mathematical tools but it is not to explain the consciousness or free will, just they mimate the intelligence, we cannot confound simply.
Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 09:55 GMT
One of the big questions is why hidden variables like asymptotic degrees of freedoms and virtual particles has to exist like a shadow universe. But why are our classical world limited to 3D? It is about our senses and our perceptions maybe, and they are not perfect, actually long from perfect, but still often many times better than any instruments we can create. This is a problem for our measurements. Also our brain modulates the information we get, around 10% of total information, and distort it... So I want to EXCLUDE humans from the measurement theory.... but again, what would be a perfect measurement, objective? I don't know.
Unsure information is often 'fixed' first. So we have two eyes, two ears, two sides almost similar, but varying a little. Maybe this thought can be used, like in LIGO, two 'arms'...? In Penrose model it would be gravity induced? Weighted scales in a way... a selection before measurement in a way...
Note that this is always a function of time. Time has also its own uncertainty (it is continous).
Life is a function of time. Symmetry breaking and decoherence...
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 18:29 GMT
Thank you Ulla,
It is perhaps true that asymptotic freedom and virtual particles point the way to a larger field of view - that reality is actually higher-dimensional. From where I stand; it looks like our familiar 3-d space is emergent. What if the higher dimensions present in some theories coexist in a more tangible way?
Perhaps saying extra dimensions are curled up is paradoxically like saying they are pasted on the edge of the universe, if the current cosmos had a higher-dimensional origin. This is I think supported by the known properties of non-associative algebras on which many higher-d theories including String theory depend.
I think the "disproof of reality" experiment is based on an incomplete measurement schema where certain conditions need to be satisfied. Briefly; the apparatus would need to create a condition such that no more than 2 of the entangled qubits are collinear and no more than 3 are coplanar. From what I recall; their whole apparatus is on a plane. So a complete measurement of this kind would require 7 qubits and prove that reality is objective after all.
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 19:06 GMT
An example...
In a universe based on the split octonions, similar to the work of Dray and Manogue; one could leave a portion of the full spectrum in a prior universe via a 5-d to 4-d spacetime transition. If we label the octonion imaginaries I,J,K,L,i,j,k; the split can leave I,J,K,L in the precursor and i,j,k in the current-day cosmos. This phenomenology is I think easier to obtain in the octonions than in String theory, to plot a way from early universe conditions to the present.
Plus a 4 or 5-d universe could coexist with our own, which raises fun consciousness questions about mystical awareness.
Also lateral specialization in the brain seems to follow a pattern where the hemispheric functions are oppositely directed in time. While one hemisphere takes things apart the other assembles, what one differentiates the other integrates, and so on. Hopefully; this is helpful.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 25, 2020 @ 10:07 GMT
Hi Jonathan, I like a lot these octonions, the E8 specially but I told me that even if they are good geonetrical alg tools , we cannot affirm that when we insert the fields like main origin it is correct, it is an assumption , the same with the strings, Dbranes and Mtheory considering the fields like main origin creating our topologies, geometries, fields, matters. If all is made of coded particles in aethers made also of particles, so the main cause is intrinsic and all is in contact explaining the waves and fields, that can converge with the octonions, a non commutativity and the strings or the geometrodynamics, I just tell that we cannot affirm the foundamental objects nor the main essence, origin of this reality, this universe. Of course these octonions, strings and otehrs can help to encricle the fields and to rank them with specific partitions, but I speak about the general philosophy of our origin, I doubt that this universe has only created photons and that they oscillate only like if an infinite heat was the answer, I just tell this, we cannot affirm when it is not proved, and my theory or the particles coded, like the strings or points, it is the same, we cannot affirm really nor the main cause nor the foundamental objects and why we exist and are conscious.Friendly
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 26, 2020 @ 19:44 GMT
It will be easy enough to affirm...
Once people know the rest of the story. I fully agree if what you are saying is that it's wrong to assume all of the higher-d constructions we can imagine don't need to be constructed, or that dimensions exist a priori. So they need to be constructable. But unlike so many others; I have concrete ideas about emergent dimensionality that fit the bill. I think you will like the octonions a lot, after seeing what I share on your global collaboration page.
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 18:33 GMT
So excellent!
It might stop people from thinking altogether though. That might not be so bad. T'san Sen said "Stop talking, stop thinking, and there is nothing you will not understand." Perhaps your grandfather was on to something.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 18:49 GMT
yes we need a lesson about the universal altruism and the humility in front of this universe, the vanity destroys all, we are all vanitious and not perfect unfortunally and we are eaily irritated and touched, the false politeness sometimes is even the fake road after all but a good new, we evolve in consciousness and we fight this vanity with an universal love like artists imaginative on this sphere earth, lol don t critic never the ideologies, thoughts, beliefs, philosophies , works of humans, they become so angry, always this vanity and jealousy, but after all we are all linked isn t it ?
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 18:54 GMT
Jonathan and John, like it seems that you are real universalists full of love and without vanity, you could utilise your consciousness and skillings in sciences and about the global generality in putting maybe some relevant ideas on my group GLOBAL COLLABORATION, we need concrete ideas, I know that you are so humble and so skillings that it could be relevant to have your general points of vue and solutions for the common well , all can be analysed, the politics, the economy, the ecology, the technology, this and that, show me your heart and your solutions, we must create a good manifest to convice this UN but , don t accept this global system but improve it with universalism and altruism and skillings in sciences and consciousness, I know that you are probably interesting persons , so show me without vanity of course...
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 18:55 GMT
Yes Steve,
We are all in this together. And if we were perfected beings already; we probably would not be in this same boat. Pete Seeger liked a song Somos el Barco; you are the boat; you are the sea; I sail in you, and you sail in me. This is the glorious dance we call life.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 18:58 GMT
I like you :) the secret is a concrete team on FQXi , I d be honored and happy if you could share your ideas for this group, global collaboration, together in team and complementarity I beleive that it is possible
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 24, 2020 @ 19:01 GMT
I must tell that it is not my work but a work of friends and all, that is why the group is created, I am not a chief or a leader, no I don t want to be this, I just really with all my heart acts correctly , I am just a simple collaborator equal to all, never I will impose rules , of course we cannot accept the irrationa or odd things, but we are all equals in this team,
Thanks much, makes the whole ordeal more worth it. Mom had said that her father had been a 32nd Degree Mason and that would have been in the reformation era in the States when the corruption of white supremacy after the civil war was being excised and the Freemasons were recovering the Enlightenment ideals of their origin which begat the Age of (European) Enlightenment and the birth of modern egalitarian democracy. He was also a lawyer, and a juvenile court, and probate judge in a small county in NE Ohio (tough order, that). My older brother was always a troublesome kid and confused the school guidance office (as I did at the time) with its doubling as truant office. Wish I'd known better in school, if I'd been sent there I would have learned its true function of prepping kids for college curriculum and would have siezed on the opportunity to take a scrap of paper thrust into my hands between classes with the phone number of an overly adventuresome 16 year old girl, to Mr Edgar and had the school straighten out the errant parents of several cliques of conspiratorial school mates caught up in the Viet Nam era reactionism exploiting my slim opportunity to immigrate to Canada and make a living up in the near north where grandpa's 'fishing camp' overlooked the widest part of the river. Now its gone too, and I daily struggle to find the humility to make sense of anything. Not a one among any of those cliques has ever approached me and simply said, " Hi John, I don't know what you might of thought, but can we talk?"
Thanks to All here for an opportunity of solice in discussion of meaningful ideas. All the Best jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 25, 2020 @ 15:31 GMT
H John, thanks for sharing this, it is beautiful and deep, I am understanding what you tell about the meaning of being and this humility, I like how you think and if you are ok, maybe you could share your ideas about the global solutions, I know that you have things to tell and that can be relevant, it is also this to be alive, live for something and make a difference , take care, all the best dear thinker.friendly
It has become a pleasure to get to know you as well. And it is helpful for me that you have worked so hard to overcome the language barrier of different tongues for I confess I was one whom at first introduction thought you were much less than you are, forgive me.
We have differing paradigms (of course) but with overall symmetries; bear with me a moment as I sketch a recent evolution. (1) let us propose that EMR is a linear sequence of a cyclic (big bang/big crunch) universe in miniature, (2) that the classical spread even in coherent laser beam projection is due to the counter intuitive physical reality that Gravity is the strongest manifestation of a unitary force in condensed matter, and the volume of electro-static repulsivity is simply larger than the inelastic core of a precipitate momentary mass, (3) that it is gravitational bounding of each seperate (e=h/f) wave-train that globally holds the bundle of a manifold of such together in the first place given carefully engineered laboratory conditions, (4) further; that 'light' only seems not to interact, though that is commensurate with a global molding together of low density fields less than a (for want of a better metaphor) fluid characteristic, (5) that by chance; when a wavetrain in one linear direction co-incides with one from another direction such that the 'big crunch' moment of one is spatially coincident with the 'big bang' limit of expansion of another, that the sequence of the particle moment train is left unchanged but it physically leaves its imprint across the entire universe of the 'big bang' limited train sequence.
??? what do you think? can your topological math toolbox wrench on that?
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 25, 2020 @ 19:52 GMT
You are welcome, and thanks also , a pleasure also to know you, I have read your posts and I found them relevant. We have different points of vue, but the most important is that we try to encircle this physicality in respecting our axioms, laws and equations deterministic if I can say. My english is not perfect , I make several errors of grammar , because I have learnt it with the vocabulary only...
You are welcome, and thanks also , a pleasure also to know you, I have read your posts and I found them relevant. We have different points of vue, but the most important is that we try to encircle this physicality in respecting our axioms, laws and equations deterministic if I can say. My english is not perfect , I make several errors of grammar , because I have learnt it with the vocabulary only and so like I am french speaking, I make some errors, sorry for this, I mix the nederlands, french, spanish and english , but hope I can be understood better. It is well said your ideas bout this cycle BB big crunch , and probably that the scales are linked, quant and cosmol, I consider also a kind of future big crunsh in my model cosmological of spherisation, I consider a kind anti gravitational push with this Dark energy, spherical and an universal sphere or future sphere and due to evolution a maximum volume in the future and aftyer like the mass increases due to the encodings and this evolution after I see a Big crunsh towards the points of equilibrium and all this from a central cosmological sphere whetre all the informations are sent to create the topologies, geonetries, matters and properties, and I consider 3 main finite series of 3D spheres , oddly having the dirac large number , so one space with the main codes and two fuels and glues, the cold dark matter and the photons, I consider that this DM is encoded also in nuclei and the reality appears when they merge in fact the 3 main series of spheres. That implies 3 main aetehrs in fact, the space , the luminiferous one and the gravitational one. And at this moment we analyse just the GR and the photons, but we need to better encircle the two others for me, all this is an assumption but I see like that. I have reached this quantum gravitation with this reasoning in changing the distances and in respecting the newtonian mechanics, because the main codes areb farer , and I have a fith force also stronger than this nuclear force, it is a little bit like if the gravitation was the main chief orchestra in fact and that the electromagnetism is just emergent, it is like if all was encricled by a deeper gravitational logic, I like so your interpretations and this gravitation. It is not easy to formalise all this puzzle , I work about this in maths, like I am not a professional, I am obliged to study things that I don t know, the main tools utilised in my theory for the publications and the formalisations and renormalisations are mainly the lie groups,algebras, and derivatives, an intrinsic ricci flow for the deformations of spheres of these finite series, an assymetric ricci flow to explain the unique things, the non commutativity, the clifford alg , the topological and euclidian spaces and convergences, more the hopf fibrations on surfaces to rank the quasi particles also, I try to create a conjecture with the strings in considering the coded particles and the oscillating 3D spheres , the bott perioditity becomes relevant, I study at this moment the hibert works also and I d like to insert them, but all this puzzle is so complex that sometimes I need to sleep, it takes all my head these spheres lol, but I evolve quietly , I liked your idea and probably that the quantum scale and the cosmological scale are in a kind of synchronisation also about the cycles, like a link between both. I consider also a deeper logic than just this BB and inflation, I beleive that we have a deeper gravitational logic before all this, maybe the error of the sciences community is to have only considered these photons like the only one piece of puzzle, and so the GR also, but we need adeeper logic for me to unify all this , to unify this quantum gravitation and this spacetime, that is why I have considered this DM cold to balance at all scales this standard photonic model , like a balance negentropy entropy, +-, electromagnetism gravitation, particles antiparticles, cold heat, ....that is why I consider the senses of rotations and their oscillations important differenciating the gravitation and the electromagnetism in a simplistic resume. I have remarked also that the DM being more important in mass can explain also the evolution, that becomes relevant for the BB big crunsh cycle, we can so claculate the maximum spherical volume and the future contraction , because I consider the DM correlated with the gravitation and the evolution, that is why I consider this spherisation, the optimisation evolution of the universal sphere or future sphere. Thanks for sharing your ideas, all the best
I can follow all of that, and of course the brief sketch I gave was only of the already light velocity projections in mid-flight so to speak. I also similarly envision DM as an extension of nuclear isolation of the gravitational potential of the full field of every unitary particle. And this goes back to an orginating hypothesis to the question: what is it about inertia that is the same for any mass regardless of its state of motion? (Answer) for a masse of energy to exhibit inertia; some portion of that total masse quantity must exist as a greatest density relative to the total quantity as a universal function of the square speed of light, (c^2).
So the Inertia density = energy total times c^2 (I=ec^2), = mc^4. and that distributes across the whole unitary field and would scale up to a global cosmological gravitational domain as you express. So... perhaps the 'flat hat' curve of rotation rate in galaxies is a function of a global regionalized influence of I = mc^4.
Does that make sense? jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 25, 2020 @ 20:48 GMT
I encircle what you tell, that becomes interesting with this fine structure constant and If I take my hypothetical equation considering this DM encoded, we have this, E=mc^2+Xl^2 , that could be relevant humbly if we consider for the charges the senses of rotation differenciating them, so that implies a kind of main gravitational chief orchestra, so we can consider the equivalence principle and the inertia and so we can consider the resistance and we can link with the acceleration, so the weight and so the mass is something else but there is a link in considering c and Xl and the momentum, the speed and acceleration becomes keys and the equilibrium of stability appears... the lagrangian and hamiltonian can be analysed, all this to tell that in fact this mass is emergent due to specific reasons encoded , electromagnetic and gravitational in a pure 3D net
I've never been clear on your extended mass:energy equivalence : +XI^2. It might be interesting sometime, to correlate your results expressed in terms of momentum, with results obtained from I=Ec^2 where density varies in direct inverse proportion to (absolute) velocity, (the masse knows its own direction by reference to its own deformaty of shape from rest spherical, and by diminishment from rest density values working from the universal minimum specific density limit exponentially distributed inwardly towards the greatest relative density). jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 25, 2020 @ 21:50 GMT
I am going to explain quickly this intuitive equation about the mass energy equivalence, it is very simple generally and it is intuitive, like I told you I consider that this Dark matter is cold and is encoded also in nuclei , in fact It is E=m(c^2+Xl^2) sorry I forgot the () , and so we have a deeper logic about the mass energy equivalence and that permits also to explain the mass better than...
I am going to explain quickly this intuitive equation about the mass energy equivalence, it is very simple generally and it is intuitive, like I told you I consider that this Dark matter is cold and is encoded also in nuclei , in fact It is E=m(c^2+Xl^2) sorry I forgot the () , and so we have a deeper logic about the mass energy equivalence and that permits also to explain the mass better than onmly with these higgs wich explain just a part, X is a parameter that I must probably improve or that we must change or adapt, and l is their velocity linear, so we have simply a deeper gravitational logic than just these photonic bosons, and we have more energy than just E=mc^2 , we don t see still this matter and it implies the explaination of the quantum gravitation but implies also a fith force, this is simply because I doubt that this universe has only created photons and that they oscillate to create our reality, topologies and geometries, see what I explained about the 3 main finite series , the space without motions and the two fuels and glues, the photons and coldd dark matter , we cannot technologically still for me analyse this matter and the energy correlated, but it seems logic for the universal balance in my mind, the problem inside the sciences community for me is to consider only these photons and GR ,that is why they cannot explain our main unknowns, the problem is that all this reasoning is different and we must think beyond the box, that does not interact with our ordinary matter and it is a non relativistic logic, see that this cold Dark matter is essential to balance our standard model and this cosmological scale, and the mass can be better understood, the momentum can be undersatood with the spheres and their motions and the distribution due to main codes in this space, the mass and the velocity simply , more the senses of rotations, more the volumes and many others thing can permit to rank all when we consider these finite series having this dirac large number, I have calculated approximatelly the number of cosmol spheres, they are the same for me that the number of spheres 3D of these quantum finite series, the space and the two fuels and so the densities, the oscillations and the exchanges can be understood with the sortings, synchors and superimposings, don t forget that we have two main different senses, so differenciating the gravitation and the electromagnetism,an universal lagrangian and hamiltonian so can appear if we have the volumes and their motions. the aim being to have the number and the mass and the momentum total of all this . Hope you encircle ny reasoning wich is an assumption, but the universe seems to have a specific cosmological and quantum link for the finite number , like if it is a kind of precise primordial serie in fact. That is why I consider that all is made of particles and that we have a kind of super matter at this central cosmological sphere and that this sphere distributes and sent the informations coded of distributions for the diversity in these finite quantum series distributing simply the energy and matters in function of these intrinsic codes.The evolution can be understood also.
Okay, I get the general idea. Kind of like the difference in structure between the aglutinative form of the English language; first I am here, and I want to go in search of something, so I go in (?) that direction, and if its not there I drop back and try another direction... or find something that changes what I think I want, and go off in that direction. Diagraming sentence...
Okay, I get the general idea. Kind of like the difference in structure between the aglutinative form of the English language; first I am here, and I want to go in search of something, so I go in (?) that direction, and if its not there I drop back and try another direction... or find something that changes what I think I want, and go off in that direction. Diagraming sentence structure is taught in English instruction in middle school. || and the hierarchial form of Romance languages, of which I speak none, but lets take French in the vernacular; Cafe du creme rather than the textbook 'cafe au lait' (who the hell says that!): in English coffee with creme is a beverage wherein coffee is such a good thing that some cream is added... but in French, cafe du creme is a process like beer is to a German, and both coffee and cream are a balance of good things. First I have a grand design, like a walled town surrounded by family dwellings then small farms as in the typical colony (the distance one can travel on foot and return during daylight) structure of Medievel Europe. Then concentrically I qualify that design towards the essential security of the idea within the walls of the town proper. Like bridges of different design, both span the chasm, one might be a cable suspension type and the other a cantilever truss type and the shadows of each cast different patterns of the structural members as we drive across.
I agree that a fifth dimension is necessary, but qualify that as meaning that a dimension is simply that by which we choose to construct some measure. So there can be two dimensions of time, one metronomic and linear (1,2,3,4,5... ) and one exponetial and non-linear (relativitic), that is to say: the Dirac result exceeding light velocity is the added velocity of maximum absolute velocity for non-linear time to "go there and back again' between nil and light velocity. This would mean that the universalality of measured light velocity is universal simply because (independent of scale) it is the root exponential mean of the linear time it would require to accelerate from nil up to light velocity). And both are
physically, parallelized operationally, like a slide rule or vernier caliper. Linear time being quadratic and flat space and non-linear being exponential curved space.
I also agree that a true quest for quantum gravity much allow for a distributive transform theorm by which 3D and Relativity can both be expressed topologically as need be (again with the Joy Christian framework of continuously becoming spacetime) best jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 26, 2020 @ 11:48 GMT
Hi John, all this is interesting and beautiffully said with a mix of poetry and logic, I like. Like I told you I like to write poems in french, I have read Balsac, Hugo, and others, they are good writers. About the time , like I told you , I see it like irreversible and correlated with the motions rotations of quantum spheres simply and I consider irreversible, the relativistic time if for observations and this GR, it is different about its dilation. The works of Joy christian, I am in contact on facebook are interesting, I was parano in the past with his ideas and spheres, lol I told me that professionals thoughts they were more skilling to fomalise mathematically my general idea, I am less parano now, I continue to improve my theory and I will publish. The dimensions like I explained for me are at all scales a piure 3D , I consider not really a fith dimension but a fith force and it acts in 3D more a dimension of time due to quaternions. We must be prudent about this spacetime, because like I told, if the photons and this GR are not the only one piece of puzzle, all is different , don t forget that we observe simply this luminiferous spacetime, but if a deeper logic is superimposed, all is different. Best Regards
I can understand that. And I think it well and good analytically that there be a 3D+t classical modeling capacity from which a topological realism can be based from macro observation.
My preferred paradigm is that energy exists as the manifestation in reality of the tension between space and time. A cube is the most efficient way of filling space and can be quadratically...
I can understand that. And I think it well and good analytically that there be a 3D+t classical modeling capacity from which a topological realism can be based from macro observation.
My preferred paradigm is that energy exists as the manifestation in reality of the tension between space and time. A cube is the most efficient way of filling space and can be quadratically found as flat by finite measurement mathematical results.
A sphere is the most efficient way to enclose space and is non-linear and non-finite in its measure by mathematics (the irrationality of pi). The arrow of time might be best reduced in 2D as likened to an old spiral bimetal spring, you know... like for an old fashioned electric choke mechanism on the carb of an aspirated car engine: a small heater coil in the spring carrier warms the spring and its different metals expand at differing amounts and it uncoils, coupled to a
cam that rotates the choke plate open in the carb throat. So I take the spring out, cold, and uncoil it on my work bench and that parallelized tension is the inherent energy of that 2 dimensional region of 'spacetime'.
Now (!) suppose that because there cannot be absolute nothing-ness, there has to be space but that takes time for it to discover if its flat or spherical. So the energy of tensor analysis in field theory continuously becomes real, manifesting the difference between a length of span of duration, and the length of span of distance. When span of time is less than a span of distance, time will seek to 'catch up', but the span of distance will also lengthen in response. And this will progress up until the Dirac result is achieved as some factoral of eponentiation by which point the further extension would be at a rate of a self-replicating factor, such as the Golden Mean, Phi. If a (Boolean) Intersection of time and space are such that the span of time is greater than that of a span of distance, then the reverse will happen and the progression will accelerate towards extinction. This would also allow for the theoretical results in lab experimentation for a discrete quantum moment of linear time apparently 'running backwards', because the instant of extinction of the energy tensor would itself be an energetic event and exceed the point on local spacetime where its extinction occurs, it would briefly 'double back'.
Once again, the term consciousness is ambiguous and therefore not very useful for science or AI. Free choice is a much better way to show why we act the way that we act. Here is Penrose’s abstract with free choice replacing consciousness and shows that free choice is just Penrose’s orchestrated objective reduction.
Abstract: A common scientific view is that the actions of a...
Once again, the term consciousness is ambiguous and therefore not very useful for science or AI. Free choice is a much better way to show why we act the way that we act. Here is Penrose’s abstract with free choice replacing consciousness and shows that free choice is just Penrose’s orchestrated objective reduction.
Abstract: A common scientific view is that the actions of a human brain could, in principle, be simulated by appropriate computation, and even that it may not be too far into the future before computers become so powerful that they will be able to exceed the mental capabilities of any human being. However, by using examples from chess and mathematics, I argue, that the free choice is something essentially distinct from computation. Nevertheless, I maintain that free choice is the product of physical laws, whence free choice must result from physical processes of some kind. Yet physical actions, over a huge range, can be simulated very precisely by computational techniques, as is exemplified by the LIGO gravitational wave detectors confirming precise calculations, within Einstein’s general relativity theory, of signals from black-hole encounters in distant galaxies.
Despite this, I argue that there is a profound gap in our understanding of how Einstein’s theory affects quantum systems, and that there is reason to believe that the events termed “collapse of the wave-function” take place objectively (gravitational objective reduction, OR), in a way that defies computation, yet should be observable in certain experiments. It is argued that each such event is accompanied by a moment of “proto-free choice”, and that actual free choice is the result of vast numbers of such events, orchestrated in an appropriate way so as to provide an actual free choice (Orchestrated Objective Reduction, Orch-OR).
Penrose concludes that his proto-free choice may reside in the microtubules associated with neural synapse and would therefore be beyond computation. Of course, EEG spectra do show both deliberate coerced choice as well as arbitrary free choice (see Mudrik’s talk) and so quantum gravity phase noise would have a lot to do with free choice.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 25, 2020 @ 18:00 GMT
There are a hundred trillion cells in the body. Every one of them acts like a battery. Is it any wonder that we experience hunger, wants, desires?
Incidentally, the entry point of consciousness by a soul is not micro-tubules, it's wave functions. Wave functions come from the Planck scale and transmit our experiences back down to the Planck scale.
Free choice is really only possible for those with prosperity. Yet we can all make choices. But the question is: can we all get what we want?
If you want an AI that can actually perform helpful work around the house, that would really help humanity. I don't think it needs actual consciousness.
It is the 200 billion neural synapses that determine free choice...Prosperity is a result of free choice not the other way around. Our emotion spectrum determines feeling and feeling determines free choice. The matter-action universe is made up of matter, action, and quantum phase and so wavefunctions represent that reality.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 26, 2020 @ 17:56 GMT
It is my opinion that matter occupies wave functions. The distinction is that, if we experience feelings, it is because wave functions are part of the human soul/spirit. I assume that wave functions are describing actual things that are not part of the standard model (yet) but someday will be. Wave functions are like space, somewhere to put a particle (electrons, atoms, chemistry, etc.). Particles don't feel. Consciousness is more of a spiritual field (spirit field). A spirit field "Feels" what it's like to have molecular chemistry going on, thus experiencing "being alive". At least this way of organizing things makes more sense to me.
It is also more natural and respectful toward humanity to acknowledge their soul, unlike the atheist science community that likes to enslave common people by telling them they don't have a soul.
Matter is a wave function, that is true and not opinion. We feel because of emotions and the neural impulses of feeling are wave functions and are part of free choice. Wave functions describe actual things like free choice that are not part of the standard model (yet) and never will be. Wave functions are never empty space and always carry particles (electrons, atoms, chemistry, etc.). Particles don't have emotions and so don't feel or have free choice. Free choice is more of a spiritual field (spirit field). A free choice field "Feels" what it's like to have molecular chemistry going on, thus experiencing "being alive". At least this way of organizing things makes more sense to me.
It is also more natural and respectful toward humanity to acknowledge that there are things that Science cannot measure, like free choice. Free choice does exist and people argue over whether free choice is free or not, but since Science accepts free choice even without measurement, free choice transcends reality. Just like a soul, free choice represents something unknowable and yet free choice does exist. That is why free choice is a very good definition of a soul.
I object to being presumed upon by the doctrines of religious adherents, whom mistake the logical humanism of a|theism as "enslaving 'common' people by telling them that they have no souls".
Quite frankly, I've known combat veterans, cops, criminals and Hell Angels whom have all experienced the moment of confronting their own mortality, and whom none feel a need of some promise of an...
I object to being presumed upon by the doctrines of religious adherents, whom mistake the logical humanism of a|theism as "enslaving 'common' people by telling them that they have no souls".
Quite frankly, I've known combat veterans, cops, criminals and Hell Angels whom have all experienced the moment of confronting their own mortality, and whom none feel a need of some promise of an afterlife or reward for playing nice with other children, to have a genuine and matter of fact respect for the mortality of all others. That IS soul. You have this life, what more of a gift does Mommy have to provide you?
Oh, by the way Hell's Angels hold Church too, but don't mistake it for some sort of 'devil worship' Its more like a serious businessmen's lunch with benefits. And you don't want to short the collection plate or ya git 'spoked'. That is a ritual sacrifice performed by rolling the 'hold-out's' own Hogly Dawgly up on its rocker (that spring loaded trapeze under the engine frame - not the kick stand- that swings down and allows a center of gravity fulcrum so that the frontend or rearend and chain drive can be serviced with one of the wheels off the ground) firing it up until it sits and thudders, but not so long as to overheat without the chill of highway wind over its cylinders and wrenching the pennant's palm hard backwards til the extensor tendons force the fingers straight and are inducted into theblurring spokes of the rear wheel. The sinful may repent but as the ol' saying goes 'no act of contrition: no red wine", and hey, sorry you blundered in here, we was mistaken, well.. you might be recognizable and wicked (meaning genuine) by a little nip off a finger tip, your choice of course to stick your finger in the fan, then spill the whiskey in a jar and soak it, have a beer and a smoke. Maybe a loose one? earnin' her wings. The real world's out here. That's why the lower arc on the colors is called 'the rocker' like for San Fransico (Warm San Fransico Night - Eric Burdon and the Animals) or Simcoe County ( gawd I miss the place ), That always utilitarian trapeze under the frame. And if you see colors being displayed and its not a casual gesture, just mind your own business because there is contested turf in dispute and it's none of your business.
And I've never known self-righteous indignation to be any deterent to crime, violence or unjust punishment. It's a Fraggin' joke. jrc
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 02:21 GMT
I don't think you know what I am. So let me tell you. For almost my whole life, I have been a Spiritualist of the Theosophist type; I still think that crystals and psychics are beautiful things and I feel bad that the atheist scientific community has treated them so rudely.
I've also been into grey aliens since I saw them when I was a kid. All my life, the stories seemed to suggest that UFO/alien technology was the road that our technology would take.
But I wanted something more. I wanted to know on a scientific basis what the real truth is. Then I discovered Intelligent Design. The atheist physics community has gone out of its way to disparage even the idea that our physics constants mattered. You literally set them all to 1 and then argued that they didn't matter. But the physics constants do matter. There are no known equations that tell us what those values should be. But if you start changing their values, then suddenly chemistry doesn't work anymore. I work with engineers, so I know engineering when I see it.
Mr John Cox,
So you "object to being presumed upon by the doctrines of religious adherents, whom mistake the logical humanism of a|theism as "enslaving 'common' people by telling them that they have no souls"."
I believe in freedom of speech. I believe that the best way to get to the truth is to debate the merits of both sides.
I get the feeling that fear the truth about what a debate might reveal.
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 26, 2020 @ 18:10 GMT
I have never seen a more obvious attempt to enslave and tyrannize humanity by telling them they have no soul, and then discounting all the evidence, contact and communication with spirits, throwing it out like a medieval villain throws an unwanted baby off the castle tower.
Physics only makes sense if wave functions are seen as part of a "spiritual" phenomena. Atheist physicists talk about 26 dimensional superstrings, but can't even come up with an experiment to prove their existence. Yet to say that a wave function could exist with 26 or more degrees of freedom as something that can exist without biological cellular structures is somehow heresy!
Atheists like to say that "WE" don't know; but the truth is that some people have eyes to see what's going on, and it's more accurate to say "YOU" don't know that you have an everlasting soul that grows more complex as it experiences many lifetimes. Each lifetime is like packing up this 26+ dimensional wave function so that it fits into a 3D+1 biological body (whether it's comfy or not).
Free will is your choice to: eat the cup cake or not. That means that you can make choices for short term pleasure or long term advantage. All this other stuff I hear about choice being "NOISE" is bonkers!
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 26, 2020 @ 19:35 GMT
This reader never said there is no soul...
But the challenge, in making things scientific, is to devise a context where what we know from Science and what Spirit tells us can simultaneously exist. Penrose has taken a stab at this and deserves to be respected for it. His idea is tangible and remains plausible. He has taken a lot of undeserved ridicule instead, from reductionists in the life sciences.
It is even a greater challenge to find a common basis for God and Science. I have some ideas on this and it appears you do too. But I doubt either of our conceptualizations reveal the grandeur of the truth. Most people don't know Math was the tool God used to invent the universe (if you like that metaphor), but that you have to apply all of it at once.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 26, 2020 @ 19:48 GMT
I am glad there are those in the science community who are more enlightened than atheists like Steven Hawkings and Niel DeGrasse Tyson who use their fame to disparage the idea of a soul as being a parlor trick of nature. Neither of whom made any significant contributions to physics.
Furthermore, it's not a metaphor that God used mathematics to create the universe. It is my view that gravitons expand at the speed of light and fill all space with 4D relativistic geometry. Objects that act like mathematics.
Say what you want about how "nobody really knows". But between you and me, I know how to create an experiment that can prove the existence of gravitons. In contrast, the atheist physics community has nothing to test or to prove the existence of superstrings or quantum loops.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 26, 2020 @ 20:23 GMT
Hello to both of you, I like the 3, Penrose, Hawking and Neil Degrasse Tyson, they are general and skilling, I have read the book a brief strory of times, I have seen all the cosmos of Neil de gRasse Tyson, they have their own philosophies and they share relevant ideas, the series cosmos were very good , they have assumptions but the most important is their works concrete, like Penrose he has pondered many relevant papers on Aarxiv, I have learnt all his papers , of course he has several assumptions like his ideas about the quantum gravitation and the hard problem of consciousness , but they try to explain unknowns and share wonderful general ideas, nobody knows the origin of this universe really nor the foundamental objects after all, we just try to find explainations. They are genius for me and it is more than respectable. Like told Jonathan, never he has told Penrose about the souls , he has like all his philosophical ideas but here it is about this model of consciousness and in reading his papers , the reduction is very interesting. These 3 thinkers have given to the world relevant things, with different methods,I have dreamt so much with the series cosmos, Neil Degrasse Tyson has endorsed me on linkedin before my hackings on this platform, I was obliged to stop, I had too much problems by odd persons, Regards
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 05:57 GMT
Steve,
I wouldn't disagree with your view point if I didn't think it was a stumbling block to getting to the more exciting things that universality has to offer. The ET's are very close and are communicating telepathically. I don't want to wig you out or anything. It is my opinion that they will confirm their existence in president Trump's second term, and we will discover that human beings are no longer the highest form of life or the most developed intellectually either but mental muscle or by technological prowess.
From their point of view, the human race represents an amazing challenge and also an opportunity to bounce ideas off of.
From our point of view, the aliens would be a scary unknown that might lead some people to fear and take up arms against. But that is totally an overreaction and unnecessary. They don't want that.
But how do you tell a bunch of humans that "we mean you no harm" and "don't worry about the fact that we abducted a few of you and some of you didn't come willingly so we had to restrain you." Abashed smile!
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 06:00 GMT
Steve,
The science community always has preconceived notions about what aliens are really like, and those notions are almost always incorrect. We should treat them like an older brother or sister.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 11:13 GMT
Hi Jason, I have my own ideas about the lifes in our universe, it d be very odd to think that we are alone of course with these more than 10000 billions of glaxies, probably we are numerous, planets less evolved, others more evolved and an incredible diversity due to different environments and adaptation and combinations due to evolution. I tell me that the consciousness is in improvement and that...
Hi Jason, I have my own ideas about the lifes in our universe, it d be very odd to think that we are alone of course with these more than 10000 billions of glaxies, probably we are numerous, planets less evolved, others more evolved and an incredible diversity due to different environments and adaptation and combinations due to evolution. I tell me that the consciousness is in improvement and that the technologies also for the advanced civilizations, the universe is enormous and it is very difficult to travel inside it but of course it is possible with deeper technologies, maybe we are seen by an advanced civilizations, I don t know I cannot affirm of course, maybe some civilizations travel already but the probabilities exists and it seems difficult to have aleins on earth at this moment for several reasons, but I don t affirm, if they can travel inside the galaxies or between these galaxies, so their technologies are very advanced and in logic for me they respect the natural evolution of planets and so they cannot interact or change it, they just study us for their own knowledges, maybe even we could not seen them if they utilise technologies that we don t understand still, if they want to help, maybe they utilise technologies also that we cannot encircle for the informations, but all this is an assumption of course, we need proofs and facts. One of my dream is to discover all these planets where the lifes have emerged, I d be so fascinated to discover all this universe and its planets with lifes. Sometimes I dream about this, actually with our technology and this relativity we have sent messages with the program SETI but that needs time to reach a planet evolved and if we receive a message , it is the same we receive a past message if they have utilised these actual photonic waves, and if they utilise a kind of deeper technology with speeder waves than c , so we cannot still receive them and analyse them unfortunally, all this becomes very complex but it is fascinating also. All seems a question of technology after all and determinism still about our sciences. That implies limitations unfortunally actually because we are still youngs on this sphere earth.
Science is not a belief system of inductive logic [i.e. 'Aristotilian' : I have recognized some such a thing so I will look for supporting arguments] with an objective of establishing some absolute 'Truth". Many would pluck a splinter from another's eye while having a plank in their own, and come here not to learn what the cutting edge of theoretical thinking is, but with their own preconceptions of how They are going to save science from itself. {I prefer George Carlin)
Science is the discipline of deductive logic [i.e. 'Gallilean' : I observe this or that and construct a strictly limited set of measurable tests, and search for anything which can disprove my hypothesis] with an objective of seeking the right questions. Keep everything else in Church, that's what church is for.
The salient point is simply that while we might deduce that there are causal realistic physical influences underlying all phenomenae, that does not mean that those causal effects do not occur by chance. God or Not, nothing works perfectly. jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 14:41 GMT
I agree totally with you John, the only one way for the sciences seems that we must prove all our assumptions, it d be very odd to affirm things not proved simply. Of course we can have our philosophies or extrapolations and we can discuss about them in being tolerant but we cannot affirm them, nor in philosophy, nor about god or not, nor about assumptions. It is evident and not need or a proof for this, I have read the book of descartes about the method, and I like also galilei he was famous, I beleive that all real general thinkers and scientists must recognise this, only the mathematical proofs or experiments can be accepted. We must doubt I beleive simply when we cannot affirm. Regards
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 18:42 GMT
How to convert entangled photons into a gravity field is easy to explain, but very difficult to perform technically. I imagine two entangled photons to actually be a graviton trapped between the two photons. The graviton contains momentum states that are randomly distributed. I advocate the premise that if these momentum states were distributed in a linear way, even a little bit, that the...
How to convert entangled photons into a gravity field is easy to explain, but very difficult to perform technically. I imagine two entangled photons to actually be a graviton trapped between the two photons. The graviton contains momentum states that are randomly distributed. I advocate the premise that if these momentum states were distributed in a linear way, even a little bit, that the result would be an acceleration field. Of course, if you had unlimited resources and technology, enough to created a near infinite number of entangled photons with momentum states that were extremely linearized, the inevitable result would be a worm hole. You wouldn't need black holes or extreme quantities of mass to create such a worm hole. All you would need to do is to simulate two conditions for each "biphoton": (1) redshift or climbing out of a black hole (notice I said simulate) and (2) blueshift or falling into a black hole.
Simulating the redshift/blueshift can be done with centrifuges. You would need to attach optical fiber along the radius of a disk that can be spun to as fast as you can spin it without the disk tearing itself apart, many thousands of RPMs (revolutions per minute). And the radius of the disk (and the optical fiber), has to be as long as possible (within engineering limitations), possibly a meter or even two meters in radius.
I've worked out the mathematics, and you would have to target the blue shift photons at the inner end of the optical fiber, and then collect the photons at the outer end of the optical fiber. It is hard enough to accurately target a tiny optical fiber inlet that is moving thousands of meters per second,
Every time you complete a successful centrifuge of the entangled photon, its momentum states are aligned a little bit. But if you want to create gravity beams and propulsion drives, then you have to centrifuge the same photons millions of times with an overall attenuation less than 1%.
As you can see, the technical specifications are enormously difficult. It's easy to explain, possibly easy to understand, but enormously difficult to develop the engineering equipment to fully realize it.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 19:05 GMT
Hi, all this is general and interesting Jason, I beleive that the senses of rotation, the cold dark matter, the antimatter, the quantum gravitation are correlated and we need to find the secret to check this gravitation, it is not baryonic and not relativistic for me. We just discuss of course and we don t affirm these ideas, but this gravitational non baryonic universal balance seems the secret, so in logic if we want to check this gravitation , we must change the senses of rot of the system utilised like a spaceship more the spherical field around more the space where we travel, that implies so 3 systems to check technologically in my hypothetical reasoning.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 19:17 GMT
an other thing wich intrigues me is this dark energy because it is a kind of anti gravitational push that I consider spherical, its pressure is negative also, that can be linked with the cosmological constant maybe, but the real interest is that this energy is there and around us everywhere,maybe we must consider it also , so we have 4 systems to check even , my idea is simple, I consider 3 finite series of coded spheres, it is an assumption, but if this vacuum space is this dark energy, so we have a road , that is why we must check the 3 finite series more the field around , that becomes complex technologically but very simple generally, baryons, non baryons, and vaccuum.....
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 19:18 GMT
Everyone believes that spacetime exists. But what is spacetime made of? Space and time, right? LOL But my model advocates that there are gravitons that begin as a point from the Planck scale, and expand at the speed of light. All gravitons that are older than t = 15 seconds will overlap and begin to contribute to spacetime. The Einstein equations should be thought of as an equilibrium state that is achieved when gravitons get large enough and overlap.
Non equilibrium spacetime events could be used to create superluminal propulsion.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 19:22 GMT
sure it is foundamental this spacetime but I consider a deeper logic than just this luminiferous spacetime implying this GR, it is just baryonic but I beleive that we have adeeper logic superimposed, we see just at this moment these baryons and photons, we need to encircle the dark energy and this dark matter and this gravitation like main chief orchestra, the balance is there explaining all our unknowns for me, but I don t affirm, I try just to encircle this universal puzzle
Actually, that view has long been in disrepute. Variations on the theme which you espouse have been prevalent for 3/4 of a century.
In truth, there is no meaningful test for either conjecture; either a spacetime primordial origin, or virtual particles in the void. One can propose hypotheses and postulates after the fact of stated axioms, but such are doctrinaire and prudence dictates that preference for one paradigm or the other are originally arbitrary conjecture. jrc
addendum; You might like to look up the first cloud chamber photograph of an electron:positron annihilation (Wolfgang Pauli and ohhhh... crap! was it Feynman?). Tell me that ain't a wormhole! just not big enough or long enough for SfX sci-fi movies.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 27, 2020 @ 19:50 GMT
Lol Let s conjecture dear John, the spheres 3D instead of strings, the gravitational aether instead of luminiferous one, the particles of gravitation like primoridal instead of photons, after all without conjectures, we don t conjecture and we don t go farer :) they turn and oscillate so they are , poincare and perelman d agree maybe
so would you say that your quantum gravity is loopy not stringy? Would the loop be like the wavefunction track around the contours of a 3sphere subject to deformation? If so... wouldn't the n^500 estimatable possible string oscilations become like a catalogue of radii warpage within the 3sphere given that the 14 dimensions in String Theory could each represent a single pole dropping to zero point center from the six cardinal points on the (rest) uniform sphere and the eight subordinate points at mid-points of the surface octants on that original ideal sphere? jrc
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 01:29 GMT
We know that spacetime exists because we have a GPS satellite system that uses GR and QM to achieve very accurate global positioning.
Nobody has asserted my idea of an expanding graviton. Nobody has suggested that gravitons are made of quantum states for position and momentum. Nobody else has suggested that wave functions are not only real things, but that gravitons are captured by particles to become wavefunctions. Nobody else is saying that gravitons escape particle systems, expand at the speed of light, overlap, and fill all space with spacetime geometry made out of quantum states. Based on this simple premise, an experiment can be performed to manipulate gravity as a non equilibrium event.
Nobody else has suggested these very basic ideas. The professional physics community still thinks spacetime is made of strings and loops, but they're wrong! Spacetime is made of spheres. Not static spheres. Expanding spheres.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 08:58 GMT
Hi John, you know I see very simple this universe, for me the 3D coded particles spheres are the choice of this universe, not need of extradimenions and fields like origin. I just consider these 3D pshres and these finite series like the main essence,and they are deformed and create our reality just with intrinsic main codes, the geometries, topologies, matters, fields don t appear due to fiels external if I can say, I consider that all is made of particles, and the relevance if that they are in motions ortations and oscillations simplye these 3D spheres , I don t consider these loop or strings , but that can converge, see the the bott periodicity can be considered also and also other ideas of geometrical algebras to conjecture these spheres and strings. The main important different is the philosophical origin of our geometries, topologies, matters, fields and evolution.
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 01:33 GMT
A wormhole is a strong acceleration field along a linear path. Physicists could literally create one within a few years if they listened to me and put their mind to it.
A wormhole occurs when the relativistic mass is not shed as quickly as would the negative acceleration require. Spatially, a temporal displacement occurs and the particle simply goes from being in one conjunctive pair position to another in the same instant of linear. time. And it is typically along what would trace as a graduated curved trajectory.
Is that what you are trying to say?
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 03:17 GMT
Theoretically, a worm hole could be created that lift people or objects off the ground onto a moving platform with a vertical acceleration field of 3g, and a cylindrical field 3 meters wide, 100 meters long.
I'll admit recognizing your misspelling of 'wormholes' as 'work holes' only to point out that if you studied the physics you condescend to, you would know enough to understand that in the kinematics of high energy particle research the 'work function' is a proven measurable that is expressed clearly in my concise interpretation of the previously sited cloud chamber photograph. Rapidity (Theta) is the rate of change on the slope of a curve, and is part in parcel of observational analysis in accelerator experiments.
Secondly, if you are going to chastise working physicists for not doing your work for you, you can take your thinly veiled Creationism and get yourself some paying work with Betsy DeVoss or Jerry Falwell.
Co X
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Pardon all the digressions, I do agree with the thesis abstract you propose in the second paragraph of the header.
There is still much that may or may not be deemed as constituent of the allusive 'hidden variable'. But somewhere our human sentience does come into temporary being and it is worth a critical purely scientific look. Keeping the scope manageable is a problem in that higher order manifestations begg reduction. One such is live mice studies of memory maintenance where it has been shown that chemical triggers at the synapse promote new growth of neurons with ancillary dendrite interfaces. Hence fallible memory but also metamorphic mental processes. That is at such a higher order that one cannot simply ascribe it to a globalized quantum level 'entanglement'.
Thank-You, jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 17:55 GMT
Like I said, John, I know how to set up the experiment, but it's technically very challenging. If you listen to me, we could be mining ore from Psyche 16 in twenty years! No more of this endless unproductive theoretical mathematics that looks dazzling, but doesn't get you anywhere.
I'm not chastising you to make you Christians. I'm trying to point out that the physics community is lost in a marsh of mathematics that isn't leading to new technology. If you'll just think about what I'm saying, that gravitons actually do exist and they (1) fill space with quantum states for position/momentum and (2) expand at the speed of light, then you will unlock the next level of technology.
Believe what you want, namely that gravitons actually exist.
So engineer an experiment and find one, just one to begin to prove what you now can only say you 'imagine (your word)' to be the physical reality of entangled photons. Given anyone can agree on what a 'photon' might be. Until then, what you have is hypothetical, non-differentiated energy values which theoretically are conjectural. Prove the physical existence of gravitons in a loophole free, fully falsifiable experiment.
Until then, whats that got to do with Penrose's thesis?
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 19:30 GMT
I would love to prove it, if I could. To give you an appreciation of what the experiment would look like,
Stage 1: Use a crystal to split a laser beam into two entangled laser beams, p1 photons and p2 photons. P1 photons would go to the redshifting centrifuge and p2 photons would go to the blueshifting centrifuge.
Stage 2: Centrifuge disks would have an optical fiber that is attached from the outer rim, r2, to the inner rim, r1, along the radius of the disk. The Equivalence Principle suggests that a centrifuge would produce a centrifugal force that is equivalent to a gravity field.
The idea is to build a disk with a rotational velocity and r2-r1 that will maximize the frequency shift of the photons that are directed into the optical fiber. One has to catch the entangled photons as they come out of the other end of the optical fiber.
By redshifting the p1 photons and blue shifting the p2 photons in this way, it is suspected that the momentum quantum states between the entangled p1 and p2 photons will come into alignment (at least a little bit), so as to produce a gravitational acceleration between the p1 and p2 photons.
It is hard to centrifuge photons like this one time. In reality, it will be necessary to centrifuge the p1 and p2 photons repeatedly, as much as a million times, without less than 1% attenuation.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 19:39 GMT
John,
Can you describe an experiment that proves quantum loop gravity exists? Or a useful application of quantum loop gravity?
One thing you can do is to get rid of the "loop" nonsense. That will give you: quantum gravity. Then, assume the existence of a sphere that expands at the speed of light, from a point AND has quantum states built into it.
At least if you had the right model, you could make actual progress.
Dear John, here is a relevant paper of Roger Penrose, Ivette Fuentes, Richard Howl, it is about an attenpt to unify the quantum theory and this general relativity with a Bose Einstein condensate, I liked how they gravitize the quantum theory for measurements and quantizations, they recognise that there is a problem and that it is unclear in fact , this Bose eisntein condensate for me is very relevant , I have made the same for my renormalisation of this quantum gravitation, I have just like I told you encoded this cold dark matter and considered 3D finite series of spheres and their motions, rotations oscillations, they have utilised the sphere in this work. I d like to discuss with them about all this, it seems relevant and I could explain them my model having reached this quantum gravitation in respecting the newtonian mechanics, I have just changed the distances and otehrs because the main gravitational codes are farer , so we must take into account a different logic that just the protons and electrons to resume.They are just emergent in fact.
Here is the paper on arxiv https://arxiv.org/pdf/1812.04630.pdf
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 19:55 GMT
Perhaps try using entangled photons. Try blueshifting/redshifting the entangled pairs using centrifuges with fiber optic cables on them to simulate the Equivalence Principle. Basically you'd be charging up the entanglement with gravitational potential energy.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 20:07 GMT
Hi Jonathan,Jason,
Jonathan, you are welcome, yes indeed they are good this team, I liked a lot their papers,
Jason, it seems difficult but possible, we have just some problems technological due to scales that we cannot reach and temperatures also probably , but we can
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 23:09 GMT
For this experiment to work, and the technology that emerges. we have to duplicate the effect of entangled photons, p1 redshifting as it climbs out of the gravity well of a black hole, and p2, as it blueshifts while falling into a gravity well of a black hole. We don't have black holes, but we do have centrifuges and we have fiber optics.
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 28, 2020 @ 19:36 GMT
As for the abstract, AI, Consciousness, Computation, and Physical Law by Sir Roger Penrose, the real question is: do we care if AI robots that can do common tasks have consciousness? If they can serve humans by doing chores, then they have fulfilled their purpose.
Human consciousness is meant to do more interesting and exciting things! Human beings are meant to fulfill their purpose, which is unique to the individual.
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 04:12 GMT
While you are correct...
I would ask you to get off your high horse Jason. John is right; the question is the relevance of Penrose's approach for a physical mechanism or framework in which consciousness might reside or arise. It is rather a trivial thing to have the emergence of conscious properties in physical matter - if you assert the physical universe was first created by a conscious entity.
What Penrose is attempting to do is in many ways harder. For you to say this angle of approach is invalid is a specious argument that ignores the need to be able to prove premises through scientific evidence. What is your evidence procedure to clinch the case that Penrose's work is irrelevant? I doubt you are even thinking in those terms, and instead want Penrose to adopt your view.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 05:55 GMT
I have an idea for a hierarchy of fields, some of which make the standard model possible, but others are higher dimensional fields that are better compared to spirit/spiritual planes of existence.
To be candid, when I try to explain how a spirit/soul is related to a quantum field, I get this feeling of dread because I know that you'll just doubt what I'm saying. Trying to explain how these things work to a "learned man of science" is torture because you won't accept any new ideas other than your own.
I'm also the guy who figured out that the expanding graviton makes more sense than superstrings and quantum loops, but the physics community is too high on their high horse to listen to that suggestion either.
Maybe in 50 years from now, the physics community will figure out that they all have souls. Maybe you'll realize that you were wrong in your criticism of people who believe in ghosts, God, UFO's, abducting ET's; maybe then you'll get off your high horse and on the highway of technology development. Only then can we fly around our solar system, exploring, mining for minerals, meeting new life forms.
I'm gonna go way off topic here just to touch base with you, Jason.
So... how did Moses get all twelve tribes together in the most fertile center of the Nile delta, to foment rebellion and escape slavery in the first place? Do you really want to believe that the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids, were the only race of people in the history of human civilization to evolve a slave...
I'm gonna go way off topic here just to touch base with you, Jason.
So... how did Moses get all twelve tribes together in the most fertile center of the Nile delta, to foment rebellion and escape slavery in the first place? Do you really want to believe that the ancient Egyptians who built the Pyramids, were the only race of people in the history of human civilization to evolve a slave holding society and be so damned stupid that they would allow all of them to congregate rather than break up their social order to the point of selling family members up the river?
Fast forward to the modern era. What real chance of peace is there in the Middle East if the Judeo-Christian West promotes such a preposterously obvious lie that rationalizes the genocidal campaign the Jewish people were forced into, in search of a new land when they were blamed for plagues that modern scientific research can explain as natural causal events, and were driven out by the Pharoh's army?
Flash back to Sunday School... have you ever thought to question those cartoon pictographs in the little books that depict a Lady in a blue dress riding on a donkey led by the bearded guy in a white robe past the ruins in the desert with the ends of logs supporting the roof, sticking out the top edge of the abandoned buildings? In a desert? Why would anybody waste their time dying of thirst to build a town in the middle of a desert in the first place? Maybe it was because until the pillage of the Mediterranean basin by the Romans, the shores supported forests, grasslands and savannahs until the people had nothing left for fuel than to burn the dung of their animals and had nothing with which to fertilize the soil.
Simply put, Jason. Just like 'learning to say your sums (as Tom Sawyer once said)' is just a starting point. Learning requires learning to accept that you have to continuously go back to the origins of your accumulation of knowledge and correct what you think by addition of new insights, and that there is really very little you can be sure that you really do 'know'.
And most importantly, take time to think it trough before trapping yourself ever more tightly into a corner. Give yourself time.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 11:53 GMT
Hi John,
I have to admit that I learned some real wisdom from (quite possibly a shock to you) president Donald Trump. To paraphrase, DJT said, "it doesn't matter how hard you work. It only matters that you get results."
That's what I think of when the physics community talks about super strings, quantum loops, E8 crystals, and all of this complicated tedious mathematics that doesn't add value to engineering and established physics.
I mean, at least the religious groups wrote books and scrolls that gave the masses a direction, gave them hope, gave them a code to live by. All of this atheist bollocks doesn't even do that!
I remember when the physics community had credibility. When they said that something was true in physics, you could bank on it! But today, I hear string, loop and E8 nonsense that is not based on even one experiment.
Humanity wanted scientific confirmation of a soul, of life after death. But instead, you all made up some mathematical bollocks about 26 dimensional superstrings. At least there was evidence for ghosts! But not a shred for superstrings. There are other flaws that I could point out about superstrings. Glaring flaws!
You may not like the Creation stories of the Bible, but a Holy Spirit Creator with deeper knowledge of physics & mathematics, that created the universe from the first graviton at the smallest possible wavelength of light, with an energy E = hf = energy of the big bang, is still more believable than anything that the theoretical physics community has come up with.
God said, "Let there be light" Then, HE let the first graviton expand from a point deep in the Planck scale. The graviton expanded. The spherical wavefront of the graviton is photon. The result was the big bang!
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
DT is nothing new to me, the fool! If you seize power, you must only grab what you can grasp in your weaker hand. To wield it, you must hang onto it with your stronger.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 12:13 GMT
What is bothering you, John? I just explained how the Creator-God model is the best model to explain the cause of the big bang. I offered a mechanism of the expanding graviton. It's like you people are trying to make physics untouchable by the public by over-complicating it with mathematical malarchy!
All you have to do is think about all the parts of well established physics. The only thing that really explains all of the experimentally verified physics, is an expanding graviton that is made of quantum states.
But you want to ask my age because: how dare I challenge the physics establishment!!!
I am old enough to be disappointed that you haven't figured out quantum gravity in an experimentally verifiable way.
Trump threatened to run as an independent and the RNC let him into their primary debates on Hilary Clinton's strength, not his. A strategic political blunder that will rank along side LBJ's S.O.P. 'Tonkien Gulf Resolution" and with the same legacy of tragic consequences for the nation and have the same sociological impact on political fortunes. The right-wing red wave that has swept the nation after 1968 is now at high tide. But it is very shallow. You will find a great lonely bitterness come your mature years if you wish only to believe what you already wish to hear.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 02:04 GMT
Trump haters really have gone insane!
I liked the skills that Trump had from the Apprentice. He was someone who really knew how to get things done. The fact that he knocks "woke" culture on its "butt" was a surprise! But he was right about it. This whole idea that we "have to" open our borders for some "evolved consciousness reason" is nothing more than brainwashing! But I knew that Trump was right and the Democrats were wrong when they went after our Second Amendment rights AND when they defunded the police in certain cities. If you can't see your own mistake after those two attacks on our freedom, then it is obvious that freedom isn't a big concern to you.
sorry, I do not know which name is your surname, or given name, so I'll greet using both.
That is appropriate to the problem Sir Roger has laid out, in context to the physical laws and applicability to making a computation of intelligence beyond the arbitrary measurement of intellect common today.
How that gravitational potential expressed at Planck scale physically manifests itself is very fuzzy to me. It however does hold up that any enclosed space will have a center of gravity, and it would be interesting to get hands on psychological reports of subjects experiencing long duration space flight in free fall orbit.
Now we are getting a proper topical discussion started. jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 14:39 GMT
Hello all, it is relevant indeed but the problem is that nobody know the planck scale and so the main codes and even the origin of this universe, I beleive strongly that we can just compute the intelligence but we cannot mimate the consciousness, it is probably beyond our understanding and technology, now if one day we arrive to create an artificial consciousness, it implies a lot of ontological questions, and philosophical and even we must be prudent about all this. For me the intelliegnce is about our standard model, but the consciousness is about a deeper logic at these main codes. Why we exist, what are we, from what, why we think, why we evolve, have we an infinite eternal consciousness or are we a mathematical accident, all this is beyond our understanding, we must accept this, that implies limitations in computations, predictabilty, decidability, we cannoty confound I beleive the intellence and the consciousness, even if they can converge they seem things different. It is the same about , have we a soul, or not ? why we encode informations and how they are sorted and in function of what and where ? we are limited unfortunally. Even the foundamental objects we don t know them, even the origin of this universe we don t know, have we fields, have we coded particles and from what ??? can we affirm to know ? no unfortunally. Even this planck scale it is just an assumption also of Planck, and it is not possible to reach it , we cannot measure it. It is the same with the infinity, the infinities and the finite series, and all the partitions, we don t know really , we are youngs in fact in knowledges . Regards
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 16:06 GMT
a thing wich intrigues me is that we can rank the consciousness in different levels , I don t know how many but it seems important, the computation of the works of Turing could help of course but the complexity of mathematical algorythms is incredible in the theory computational of the mind. The procedures need to insert a deep logic and we are not there unfortunally considering these limitations of scales and main codes but a partition universal exists indeed. What is the road so ? it must be ranked and the procedures can appear , there is probably a connection and bridge with this AI, the functionalism and connectionism so become the keys with the turing method, the neural networks must of course take into account these brains and the neurosciences. How can we converge between the classical computation and the neural computation and this consciousness and intelligence, they are different in fact but bridges, rational exist.It is there that the incompleteness of Godel becomes relevant about the argumentations and informations. The cognitive sciences are so complex that a general method ranking all is necessary. I beleive strongly that the quantum computing is the secret but for this the foundamental mathematical and physical objects must be considered and I consider like you know 3D coded spheres, that can converge like a conjecture with the strings but we need also to encircle this quantum gravitation and the main codes, like this fith force also more the main codes at this planck scale of scale of these said main codes. That becomes a puzzle of a complexity beyond our understanding and it is very intriguing if we find the road. A kind of wisdom is important in these works that we extrapolate and search.
I really think that the point of the lecture on video was that we can't actually explain or define consciousness. But we have to start somewhere in a way that treats what we do know of brain activity as being what gives rise to intelligence. So firstly we kind of have to decide if intelligence itself is no more, nor more so, than just the ability to assemble a path integral and parse it together with others.
After that comes the part of how would that manifest itself in becoming aware of what we are aware of. How we can think about what we are thinking.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 16:57 GMT
Hi John, I liked this lecture, I agree with Penrose and I found his model very relevant about like you tell the begining, we must begin somewhere, I agree also with your words , this puzzle hard of consciousness is very complex but a road exists. The classical computation and neural computation seem the secret more other added parameters considering our main unknowns, we evolve in these researchs fortunally in sharing ideas and relevant works like this one of Penrose. Friendly
Given that synaptic response is at a quantum level of exchange of level of charge; properly meaning that a photonic quantity of energy is ejected from an atom(s) in the dendrites of one neuron and absorbed by an atom(s) in a neuron across the synapse, I think it might be well to look at the near proximity of the atomic structures of molecular arrangement in the dendrites.
Consider that the Transition Zone of EMR is only observable at the macroscopic level in proximity to an antennae. We can't detect it leaving an atom without an antennae. But what we do know is the the TZ from near field to far field is within the near field in the (without refreshing) first half of the first wavelength, and that the rates of decay of intensity is by the inverse square law for the magnetic domain and by the inverse cube root for the electrostatic domain while there also exists a confused region that concentrates nearest the antennae where the decay rate is by the inverse exponential root. (lots of clues there for a classical model of the particle)
So given the frequencies commonly used in 'brain scans' which are passive detection devices that are essentially super sensitive antennaes, have corresponding wavelengths much longer than the synapse itself, we can argue that those 'brain waves' that don't become all absorbed in a synaptic exchange, may result in some number of quantum jumps of electrons in the shells of other atoms in other dendrites not in near proximity. Perhaps this is physiologically the evolutionary cause that results in most neural response shown in modern brain 'mapping' to occur on the surface layers of the brain, and that the distinctive folds in the brain mass accommodate greater capacity for stimulated brain activity.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 18:17 GMT
Dear John, all cells possess microtubuls and we need to know like I told probably this deeper logic than just these photons and exchanges, if my reasoning is correct and it is an assumption that I don t affirm of course but the gravitation is the main chief orchestra and the intelligence is just about these electrons and photons but the deeper logic is farer for the consciousness, these microtubuls intrigue me and the cell divisions also , that is why is my 3D spheres are correct of course, their vibrations and oscillations can be correlated and the two fuels that I have explained and the main codes for this space, the evolution is an important point at my opinion and the exchanges also.It could be relevant to play with the temperatures and pressures, it seems for me the secret if the cold dark matter and the gravitation are correlated , the space that said for the main codes is different and probably not about this temperatures and motions, so the consciousness seem there without temperatures and prssures and without motion but I am not sure, seer that the polymerisations can be also relevant. All this to tell that the temperatures are for the gravitation cold and the electronagntism warm and that all is under a main chief orchestra for the main codes of this space without motions, that becomes intriguing because if it is this, it is complex but simple generally. Consciousness so is in this play of temperatures and pressures and distributions and intelligence also but the hypothetical soul so is in this space without motions. See the difference about the intelligence, the consciousness and the soul ......Regards
And another thing, at the risk of being called all kinds of names,
Let's consider what Schrodinder accomplished in devising the wave function. It will plot the probable location of an electron at an energy level in a normalized time frame, or more concisely over a specified brief time interval.
But that is the simplest of applications.
An atomic structure as theoretically envisioned in the std model has numerous electrons, so to illustrate let's take a clear plastic ball and stuff a string of 50 twinkle Christmas Lights in it (even Jesus might find this interesting). Now all those lights go off and on all the time depending on how much free energy they absorb or radiate and so all the hoopla about 'the wavefunction' ignores its simple utilitarian purpose. If an electron absorbs enough energy to raise it to the next orbital shell level of charge, then it has gained enough energy to be calculated as having received the whole quantum and the light will twinkle ON. It is purely theoretical to argue full quantum or preloaded, the wave equation doesn't discriminate. Its simply an event in that time window location. If the light twinkles OFF then that electron has lost a quantum for that change of level of charge, same thing. And they are all doing this all the time, in all the atoms, everywhere.
So we are back to "what if" we take the pre-loaded argument and devise some probability function that would account for twinkling some lights at some distances in a classical causal quantum distribution in regions of the brain not in immediate proximity to any particular synapses. Yeh, a quantum computer would probably be helpful for that.
So we could unfold the brain surface, as is done in modern brain mapping techniques for power point presentations, and treat it as an infinite 2 dimensional complex plane of probability domains.
Some body has got to have enough math for that. Staggers me. jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 18:53 GMT
John, all this is a beautiful general explaination and extrapolation, we serach to complete this standard model and the meaning of our physicality, If I can, I d insist on the fact that we are still very limited in knowledges , we need to add many pieces for me and in 100 years mainly, we have just imporved a little bit our understanding of this quantum mechanics and this GR and the corrlated photons and bosons, but probably that all this is a so small part of our universal logic, we observe simply a weak part of the truth.That is why I beleive that we have many things to add to complete this standard model. I liked your post, you see clear, happy to know you dear jedi of the Sphere :)
that's what I'm getting from Penrose's challenge, too. And he is presenting it in the realistic context that we not be forced to choose the God or Not conundrum, just the scientific angle, and let the mysterious ways be so.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 19:59 GMT
Between us Jason, we understand all here ion FQXi who is the most relevant between you and Penrose you know , it is easy to see and recognise , you could learn his wonderful papers instead to critic oddly, you repeat things , we have understood Jason, now please develop and go deeper because there you repeat the same things still and always and nothing is really interesting, try to be relevant liek Penrose or Susskind or Wilczek or Connes, or Dupliij, or Hooft or others, at this moment them they have proved their skillings, not you , regards
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 20:13 GMT
Teaching AI to "understand" is a waste of time.
You need to create a "wetware brain" that can behave in a way that acts like the eigenstates of a wave function. But those eigenstates are going to be things like:
1. Do dishes.
2. Pick up clothes on floor.
3. Scoop litter box.
4. Sweep the floor.
5. Put everything in its designated place.
6. Scrub toilets.
You have to use robots to do these things with little or no guidance. You also have to build these robots to be durable and to offer them on the open market for a low cost.
Remember how they treated droids in Star Wars? Exactly like that. Because they're not going to have an actual consciousness! They're going to have wetware that creates virtual constructs of things like houses, rooms, objects.
We don't want and we don't need some stupid AI to think for us. That's what humans are for.
You can have industrial robots that can do more complicated things like fix and repair other tools. Medical robots could assist the doctor with a diagnosis, but only if the patient is okay with it.
ROBOTS SERVE HUMANS! Robots should know how to make drinks, sandwiches, serve snacks. Robots have no souls and no consciousness. If you want wisdom, go climb a mountain and find a guru! Robots are servants! Robots have no rights. Robots have no feelings. Robots are not machines that feel anything. If you want to be compassionate, go find a human being to help, give kindness to or be friends with. Robots shouldn't even look human!
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 29, 2020 @ 20:32 GMT
AI is not supposed to think about the infinite. That's what humans are for. AI is supposed to be the mind of a robotic mobile tool platform. The job of the AI is to help the mobile platform to navigate the physical world so that it can perform its designed tasks, functions, and serve the needs of humans.
It is the human that is supposed to think about the infinite. It is the job of the robot to make sure the human has a snack.
The needs of the humans ALWAYS comes before the needs of the robotic appliance platform.
If you feel compassionate for robots, then you are anthropomorphizing them in a way that is inappropriate.
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 06:21 GMT
If you could accept that quantum fields lead to higher dimensional fields lead to Spirituality, then we could all work together, live happily, and create wonders beyond your wildest dreams!
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 17:52 GMT
Jason, we cannot affirm that the extradimensions are a reality,it is just an assumption like in this string theory begining in 1D at this planck scale and after the 1D cosmic field and after we extrapolate 11D or others in other tools like the geometrical algebras and this E8 exceptional group, but all this is not proved, I consider mainly particles coded, 3D spheres and this 3D for me is foundamental at all scales, it is the choice of the universe and we can also have our own philosophy and even our own interpretation of a kind of infinite eternal consciiousness creating this physicality in coding and sending informations to create our topologies, geometries, matters, fields and the evolution, I can understand what you tell but nobody can affirm these deep unknowns, we don t know in fact nor the origin of this universe, nor the foundamental objects. We must accept these limitations with humility and try to prove our assumptions. Regards
You're quite right about the abstraction of demensionality, and it is difficult to get the idea across to those whom don't like mathematics, that such things we call a sphere isn't referring to a ball but only the closed, 2 dimensional surface. Or a dimension meaning only something we decide on by which we make a measurement, such as the commonly recognized 3 axis orthogonal relationship people simply take for evidence when they look at the ceiling corner of their room. But we can also say the full side of a shoebox is "a" dimension, and the other sides are each seperate dimensions. The lack of general consensus on strict definition of terms often leads to confusion. It doesn't mean the room corner isn't itself real, but it does mean that it isn't the choice of which meaning of dimension we use that makes it real. Building materials do that. jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 18:53 GMT
Hi John, I consider 3D spheres for these quantum and cosmological spheres, the 2D is interesting for the hopf fibrations on the surfaces of these 3D spheres, that permits to rank the quasi particles for me. The universe and it is personal of course is in 3D at all scales and the 3D spheres and their rotations motions oscillations and deformations are for me the secret of all our physicality. So I...
Hi John, I consider 3D spheres for these quantum and cosmological spheres, the 2D is interesting for the hopf fibrations on the surfaces of these 3D spheres, that permits to rank the quasi particles for me. The universe and it is personal of course is in 3D at all scales and the 3D spheres and their rotations motions oscillations and deformations are for me the secret of all our physicality. So I don t consider an origin from fields but coded 3D quantum spheres, the gfractalisations of dimensions for me are just a mathematical play, I love the maths but we must be +prudent about how we interpret them and how we utilise them, they are just a tool and sometimes they can imply confusions, I was in mathes sciences strong in secondary and I have ranked the maths, and I know well my basis like the geometrical algebras, clifford, hopf,banach, lie and others, I study even the synplectic analysis and morphisms for my theory. I have even studied several wonderful books of Bronstein and Semediaev and others, I cannot stop to rank John, the maths are not difficult, but create new innovative partitions and tools in maths yes, it is very difficult. My favorite were Riemann, Poincare, Euler,Descartes,Godel mainly, they were good. The maths for me permit to prove the physics if and only if we utilise the good tools with rationalism, if not we have just assumptions like the whormholes or the multiverse or an reversible time or this or that, in fact I consider really that the physics is the main chief orchestra and the maths just a tool to explain better these physics. I agree about what you tell in general about these dimensions. If we take for example the maths of strings or this E8, we have extradimensions but for me they are just a play of maths, they are not foundamentals for our physicality in a pure 3D at all scales, it seems the choice of this universe and we observe a pure 3D everywhere, like spheres 3D , spheroids, ellipsoids and defromed spheres in fact in my observations, the universe is very simple generally , complex in details but so simple generally. I like actually a thinker very relevant in maths, I study his works about the synplectic works, it is steven Duplij, I have discussed with him, he is very relevant. The synplectomorphisms are very interesting to analyse deeper. best regards John, and viva el maths and physics with rationalism in our assumptions , we can affirm IF AND ONLY IF that respects this logic after all :) like we say, we must shut up and calculate,
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 19:06 GMT
Dear John, I invite you to read the papers of Steven Duplij on arxiv, I can affirm you he is very relevant. I learnt a lot with him, his papers are difficult and need sometimes time to encircle all his partitions and tools, but I like a lot, he is a rare general mathematicians , I am persuaded that you could like his works. He is very creative and veru skilling. regards
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 19:09 GMT
I try in fact to make a conjecture with these superstrings, branes and others and these 3D spheres and the supersymmetry for our particles ,it is like this that I have in all humility quantify this quantum gravitation with the reasoning that I have explained you before in an other thread.
How do you envisage, in an explanatory way, the Hopf fibration, given that in topology technically a 2D sphere is a 1sphere and 3D is a 2sphere, 4D a 3sphere. ?
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 30, 2020 @ 19:21 GMT
I just consider an intrinsic ricci flow inside the series of 3D psheres primoridal and an assymetric ricci flow to explain the unique things at the end , for the deformations and these hopf fibrations on the 2D surfaces are just for the oscillations and the quasi particles, I don t consider really other dimensions lower of higher but just these two roads.I beleive simply that when we consider these finite series having this dirac large number and the same than our cosmological number finite of spheres 3D , so all can be explained with correct deformations to explain all our geonetries, topologies, ...we don t need to consider other dimensions, see also that these series finite primoridal merge with the 3 series that I have explained, one main space and the two fuels and see also that I consider just like the universe bigger volumes more we go towards the centers, and see also that all this become complex because each spheres 3D cosmological is unique, so my approach is general and consioder a specific serie with symmetries, it is there that that become complex when we consider that each cosmological spheres is unique , so in logic that implies an incredible complexity cosmological but is it the case for our quantum series , I don t know really.
I kind of see it but its not what I'm looking for. Its employs a tried and true geometric descriptive method but its messy with all the great circles in a birdsnest. What I'm trying to figure out would be a way on the hypersphere to show the vector(s) of energy to be going in all directions, full n dimension^n.
Then of course the scaling, etc. for volumetric analysis.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 10:04 GMT
You are welcome John, I like also the hypershere and the works in maths with the n dimensions, I try to converge with these vectors and scalars and this energy and the links with our topologies, geometries, it is just that I consider intrinsic codes in these 3d spheres instead of these external fields like I told you, I consider that mainly this universe is made of coded particles at all scales and that these fields are just emergent due to these 3 finite series merging with these two fuels , the photons and this cold dark matter. The coded particles for me seem foundamental, we can have particles without fields but not the opposite in my reasoning, that becomes relevent if we find this conjecture between strings, superstrings Mtheory D branes and these 3D spheres because they are in motions but oscillate also in 3 aethers and so all is in contact in my model. Friendly
ps we don t see georgina, hpope she is well, she had the habit to post but now she is not here,
I don't think of it as coding, but that might be as good a word as any. I find it easier to conceive of what QM would call the 'choice function' to be a physical break in symmetry that naturally occurs (not even the universe works perfectly) and that the maths can ontologically approximate. That could be treated as coding, and while the reduced Planck function is convenient for that, I like to go back to ogrigins and look at the mathematical form of Planck's oroginal classical distribution theorem. It offers a continuous function to transform corresponding values between differing parameters of energy measurement. The thermodynamic and the electrodynamic.jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 11:55 GMT
Hello John, I am understanding, thanks for sharing,we don t know and we cannot affirm in fact, we have just our philosophical interpretations about these maain foundamental mathematical and physcal pobjects and the same about the origin of this physicality and its geometries, topologies, matters and fields, nobody can affirm these things about why we are why we exist, why we have this universe, many due strings and this GR consider that all comes from fields, me I consider coded particles and others consider other explainations. In fact we search answers . For the planck works like this planck scale, it is just a mathematical extrapolation but maybe this thing does not exist. Like I told you I doubt that we have only photons and this GR like main truth, amd I doubt that this universe is an infinite heat where these phtons have strings at this planck scale in 1D oscillating them to create this physicality, I prefer really these coded particles made of 3D finite series of spheres having oddly this dirac large number, see the relevance of combinations if these series exist and that we have the mathematical tools that I explained for their deformations and properties due to their motions, rotations, oscillations..,..thermodynamics and electromagntism of course are ezssential but for me it is just emergent properties of a small part of puzzle, we must for me and it is just my opinion insert many deeper logics like this gravitation and dark matter to encricle this universal balance and this anti matter. We know nothing in fact still and we must recognise that it is not in some hundreds years that we have all understood about the universal mechanics. I cannot affirm my theory of spherisation John but I try like all to see this general simplicity , but I see like this, the universe seems so simple generally. Regards
I sometimes wonder what its been like for those whom have had so much invested in long careers in the strange world of the prestige 'gift economy' of 'publish or perish'. I mean its easy to get a bit excited when you learn something and want to share it, but it doesn't take very long even as an enthusiast to recognize that you haven't discovered anything really new and get "Ho-Humm, yeh, that's a uhhh, well no, but have fun" sort of a reception. There are foundational questions, of course, but its really each to their own. QM and Relativity have been around for a century, I just like going back to those gaps and leaps of faith where classicism didn't have enough to go on at the time to theoretically explain what was becoming observable. There are more living physicists working today than have lived up until now, So aside from the competition, it doesn't matter how ripe I might think my stuff is, ain't nobody going to get excited and call the State militia. Ho-humm, uhhhh... yeh, uhh no, its lunch break. Oh did you know so and so just got their 1000th mark citation. Talk to your financial advisor lately? You or your ex still have that lake house? My kids would like a time share for the grandkiddies a couple weeks next summer. That's reality in the Perimeter which FQXi providesa cyber security for. Moths to the flame. jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 16:46 GMT
Dear John, I understand what you tell. We live in a global economical system very competitive and individualist, sometimes it exists teams, and I know that unfortunally many try to plagiate , it is like that, I have found this theory and universal link 23 years ago maybe and I was aware to have found an interesting thing in all humility, I have shared on FQXi my ideas many years ago and it was not...
Dear John, I understand what you tell. We live in a global economical system very competitive and individualist, sometimes it exists teams, and I know that unfortunally many try to plagiate , it is like that, I have found this theory and universal link 23 years ago maybe and I was aware to have found an interesting thing in all humility, I have shared on FQXi my ideas many years ago and it was not like now, it was just the generality, I have improved a lot, I miss my friend of FQXi the Dr Ray Munroe who worked about the E8, he was my friend and he told me , steve we don t know why we have not thought about this before, maybe many thinkers have forgotten the general simplicity and focused too much only on photons and strings. I am conscious that I must published, I am not a professional , but I will do it, I work about these publications and maths. You Know John, it is not fallen from the sky you know my theory of spherisation, this evolution optimisation of the universal sphere or furture sphere with quantum and cosmological 3D pshres, I rank all since the age of 17 maybe, I cannot stop, I have ranked the animals, the vegetals, the minerals, after the equations in physics lol, the maths, the chemistry and the biology, I was fascinated by all these rankings and you know how I have had this eureka ?? I had a book of biology and on a page we see the evolution of brains since the lemurians and the hominids, and we see a relative spherisation, the spheres are just a part, it is the spherisation the most important, this eurake was like a discovery incredible for me , I told oh my god all is in this logic, the particles and the universe are spheres and after it was evident , I was surprised that nobody had thought about this evolutive spherisation and the spheres like foundamental objects, it is what told me Ray Munroe, he even told me , steve do you know the words of Feynmann , one day we shall see all the truth and we shall see all, but how is it possible that we have not seen a thing so simple before ? I beleive that it is just because they have too much focused on details forgetting the generality simple of this universe. You know John, this theory is all my life, I am not better than the others, I have just worked hard and I want to share it and improve it simply, I am not interested in money or others, I just want to improve and search still. I am simply fascinated by the sciences, the life, the universe, I know that I irritate , probably the human nature and the vanity, several like my theory, others are disturbed because It is a little bit different and innovative, other dislike me , but I accep this. I have been encoded in the de Climont ranking like innovative and fortunally FQXi exists to protect my theory, because I know the humans and their vanity and taste of recognisings also. I just want to continue and improve my theory, I d like to have relevant mentors like Penrose of Hooft or others, I need to learn more. I don t want to destroy the works and theories of others like Witten , I just want to improve and learn and search answers to this universal puzzle.
For the house, my girlfriend and me we live in the forest like I told to Jason, in Finland in a small farm and we produce vegetals for the nursery that we open soon, you are welcome if you want, Ulla and me we create a small hotel also , this country is wonderful John and if you come, you can like the forests and the nature, I d be happy if you come. I respect also the choices of thinkers working about this GR and the strings, I just try to add things to this puzzle that I consider not complete , I doubt really that we have just photons like main primoridal essence and strings inside you know, I prefer in all humility my coded 3D spheres, for me they are more logic than these strings or points, I beleive strongly that this shape, the sphere is the choice of this universe, I consider even an infinite eternal consciousness, the sphere is like the rotations and the 3D , foundamentals simply, the complexity arrives with all the combinations and mathematical tools. This planet and its economical system and the human nature öike the competition are for me sometimes odd, I have always had difficulties to adapt me. But the system and the humans are like they are and I must adapt me, that is why I must publish , but sometimes I told me, bah it is not important all is encoded on internet and I have made my work lol, the ohers shall continue. I have seen several thinkers trying to plagiate because they are professional and beleive that they can do better with their publications, but frankly it is not important you know, I accept the human nature and I relativate. Don t forget that you are welcome in Finland, I am sure you shall like dear friend. Take care
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 16:55 GMT
you know John, when you find an innovative thing, you disturb and we know also that this vanity is unfortuannly a global parameter , we are all persuaded us the humans and we have difficulties to accept different thoughts, like I told, I irritate many thinkers due to this vanity, they fear to recognise even that my theory general of spherisation linking the universe, the cosmological scale and the quantum scale and the evolution, nobody has made this before, oh of course some have utiliseed the spheres in maths, or the MTheory can utilise the sphere, but nobody has linked the spherisation evolution and the scales with 3D spheres, you can search on arxiv or others, nobdy John, it is a fact in all humility, and between us, it seems logic my theory, even in philosophy I link the consciousness ,I am not better I repeat but I have worked hard and like I told it is not fallen from the sky, I am happy that FQXi has a cybersecurity very strong, and that the dates exist, because I am not materialist but I am noty stupid, I know the humans lol vanitous, envious, loving the power, the notoriety....it is a fact , a few number are real universal altruists humble in front of this infinite eternal consciousness if you see what I tell dear Jedi of the Sphere, many are able to sell bread to persons allergic to gluten lol but it exists things wich are not to sell for me,
That's as good an attitude as you can adopt. An old Viet Nam vet whose younger sister had been one of the party hardy (pot etc.) crowd back in the day and whom screwed things up for me more than any really recognize they did, was talking with me once about 20 years ago. And in the States for men of my generation, the Viet Nam era was as divisive as an outright civil war. Ken had said in effect that he went to Nam thinking one thing and came back not knowing what to think other than "what else are they lying to us about?", and he like many other men I've known or come to know have said, that it really is hard to come to grips with but you have to reconcile that at the time you had thought and done what you believed was best and accept that for what its worth. For my generation, it isn't why what you chose, what matters is if you are true to yourself about it so you can be truthful with others. jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 18:45 GMT
John, it is deep what you tell, it is a kind of wisdom even, I liked these words, you are a philosophe also it seems to me , not only a scientist, do you know these thinkers that I have read, Kant, Spinoza, Nietsche, Descartes, Jung, Freud, ....I have read many books in all humility , My favorites are Kant and Spinoza, I was fascinated also by Balsac and Victor Hugo in the french culture ,baudelaire ,voltaire also, Hugo is incredible in his writings and messages and Balsac is a writer taking you in the story, you see the things with the imagination because he describes the things with an incredible virtuosity, the human comedy is wonderful like creation.
Regards
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve I've read some philosophers but more in historical context. Some time ago in another topic Georgina Woodward pointed out that when it comes to consciousness and information systems, that law and legal argument have a good form for correlation. And a lot of the history of natural philosophy and philosophy in the abstract is instructive of how we think what we think today and how that has evolved into the theory of democratic rule of law that law itself must obey. Lot's of gist for the mill. It does take a liberal breadth of acquired topical knowledge to overcome that peculiar certainty of adolescence ( "I know what's what! You are what I say! So there!"). Uhhh yeh, no.
As for FQXi, I doubt many of the professionals whom contribute articles and such have any real delusions as to the existence of security protocols, and of course most of the serious hackers looking for portals into Perimeter (I mean what part of perimeter doesn't mean restricted area?) Institute would use bots not posting chat. Its the electronic footprint of all the anxious wanna-bes and all their side trips into the cyber slum that gets aggregated and passed to governmental authorities as potential watch list cranks. They need being reminded from time to time that their demands for attention are getting attention. I had a girl friend like that once, she still thinks she got away with going behind my back. It really ain't my baby. jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 20:40 GMT
Dear John, I agree totally that the democracy and the justica are essential, we cannot laugh with these things but we must be aware also that unfortunally this planet is not perfect due to human comportments, we know that still this unconsciousness and lack of rational universal logic are everywhere in all spheres of activity. The corruption also is a reality like this vanity like I repeat often...
Dear John, I agree totally that the democracy and the justica are essential, we cannot laugh with these things but we must be aware also that unfortunally this planet is not perfect due to human comportments, we know that still this unconsciousness and lack of rational universal logic are everywhere in all spheres of activity. The corruption also is a reality like this vanity like I repeat often and like the taste of power, authority, notoriety , monney and other stupid things wich have nothing to do with this said universal altruism and logic of a pure universal consciousness.
About the psychology, we evolve John and sometines we change our points of vue, but it is not the case for all unfortunally they continue in their conclusions forgetting to change their judgements, for example In the past I was against a kind of imperialism of this capitalism when I was moderator of the group africa and my aim was to create a sciences center for the forgotten like the children of some countries in africa where the suffering is enormous, I have critised several systems and I was different, I have changed and I see more global and more logical , we evolve and the consciousness also when we learn, I have relativated and changed many of my opinions in fact, the systems like the SRI CIA or darpa also must be like this, if not, they are not skilling and they can imply problems instead to evolve and change, these kind of systems for me have a big responsability and that does not laugh, we are not in a game but in the real life where all the parameters must be taken into account with wisdom. The conclusions about the psychology must always make a kind of check up , the world evolves and changes John and this universalism and the fact to create a global village harmonised is the main aim, in taking into account all heritages and cultures, the conscious universalists exist in all countries and they must help this planet to reach the points of equilibrium for the win win. I consider me like a modern rational christian in fact and I have been always too nice and I have always had difficulties of adaptation to this society wich is a circus in fact lol , sad reality unfortunally but the hope exists , you know John, we are created inside an universe and there is probably a goal to all this, we are not made to evolve like we make globally, this planet has too much suffered at my opinion and I find sad that this individualism and the fact that all we follow a non optimised system is sad, the high spheres of power must act and solve for the win win in adapting the solutions with the actual global parameters, if not we go all in the wall, and we cannot accept this for us and all lifes but for the next gebnerations also, we can plant the good seeds or continue to cultivate the ironical ideologies, we are all linked after all and there is no conflict of interest in fact , take care
Maybe the argument that would permit quantum coherence in the warm wet macro-world of microtubules would be to go with Planck's preloaded theory so that qubits are not instantaneous events, and renormalize the time parameter to 1 as a factor the Boltzmann Constant.
Before Charlie Rose was disgraced he had a series panel discussion called "The Brain" on PBS in the States, and recalling some of that and other dust in my skull, The mylean (spelling?) sheath that insulates long neurons is segmented and electro-mechanically behaves something like transformer substations in electrical transmission lines, giving a much faster response across the whole length of neural impulse. And someplace I recall that the optic nerve from the retinal neurosis to the ocipital lobe is something like a meter long and condenses the number of electro-chemical signals from the eye to the brain a thousandfold.
That and perhaps micro-wormwhole displacement of subatomic particles in a matter filled space would help qualify quantum mechanics as computational bioware. On an ad hoc provisional basis, given that free neutrons are theoretically ejected at ~90% of light velocity, if temporal displacement could occur if the relativistic mass were not shed (again, classical preloaded energy level decay lag) as fast as the relative velocity down to ~86% (Lorentz Gamma curve) light velocity, the temporal displacement would be across a very short distance in space giving at least some probability of a subatomic particle to appear to make a qubit decoherent choice in the cranial region.
jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Perhaps a cheap experiment for a Pauli wormhole detection would be to use a SQUID and a elemental Beta emitter with a smear of ballistic gel as a topological insulator, like the lithium grease on the underside of ECM when mounting it to the distributor. Then compare detection values against a cathode ray type emitter. KISS Never mind q in calibration, setting the cathode emitter to the same velocity as the isotope emitter velocity in a small vacuum chamber could use a scintillation screen, then make redundant tests of both types through ballistic gel. A measurable difference of p of the Beta particles at precise equal eeparation would argue well for Hameroff's premise of quantum interference in microtubules. jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 03:49 GMT
Steven Hawkins got it wrong! Entropy DOES leave our universe. When humans suffer, all that information is stored in the brain. All the worries, fears, survival strategies, memories of being hurt, are all stored in the memories of the brain. When we die, all those memories turn to dust. Near Death Experiences confirm this hypothesis.
Physicists who study AI got it wrong when they thought that some superior robot AI would be able to solve problems that humans can't solve. The truth is, the atheist physicists are not using their minds to their full potential. If you took up meditation, you would be able to solve problems at higher levels. I have already demonstrated that this is possible. I'm not a professional physicists and I'm not particularly brilliant; but even I can figure out how the graviton has to expand at the speed of light in order to unify QM with GR.
The purpose of AI robots is not to do with physicists can't do. You already have it in you to solve the hardest problems. The purpose of an AI robot is to make you a sandwich, do your dishes and wash your clothes while you're contenmplating the mysteries of the universe.
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 19:24 GMT
Too bad you won't talk to me about entropy. I will argue that "death" removes entropy from the universe, and that God already knew this. I'm not arguing that death is a good thing. I'm arguing that God knows how his universe works.
Steve Dufourny replied on Aug. 31, 2020 @ 20:05 GMT
Hi Jason, We can argue indeed and we can have our philosophical ideas but we must also prove our assumptions, and Penrose has probably his own ideas personal and philosophical but he is a rational scientist and he knows that inside the sciences community the thinkers prefer to not speak too much about these things because the sciences community is divided and many consider only the pure...
Hi Jason, We can argue indeed and we can have our philosophical ideas but we must also prove our assumptions, and Penrose has probably his own ideas personal and philosophical but he is a rational scientist and he knows that inside the sciences community the thinkers prefer to not speak too much about these things because the sciences community is divided and many consider only the pure mathematical and physcal proofs and equations. His model is relevant considering these mathematical tools like his orchestrated objective reduction also. See mainly the relevance trying to unify all , the neurosciences, the molecular biology, the theory of informations, the philosophy....I try to make the same in my model and these spheres in consdiering even that all is a fractal of consciousness from this infinite eternal consciousness coding but it is an assumption and I consider a philosophical point of vue considering our uniqueness.And like tou know I have considered a main gravitational chief orchestra and particles cold of DM encoded to balance and even I consider that our uniqueness that you name the souls are correlated in our main Spheres ,but of course we cannot prove at this moment this hard problem unfortunally due to still these limitations. I beleive the same than Penrose about the microtubuls and they are foundamental , but we need to go deeper also than these microtubuls for these deep philosophical questions considering the origin really like this quantum gravitation that I have quantified. See also that Turing and Godel are relevant to converge in the work of Penrose. The stochastic calculations and the unpredictabilities like the fact that we have several unknowns imply these said limitations but a partiton converging harmonical and periodic could appear if we know these foundamental objects and their distribution converging also with the classical computation, and the quantum computing in logic must appear but it is very difficult. For me the waves functions are essential but it lacks piece in the puzlle like this balance universal and so the waves must consider a superimposed logic gravitational. Because this gravitation seems the chief orchestra and that our actual GR and electyronagntism are just emergent due to main gravitational codes, it is a littöle bit if I told that this standard model is encircled by this gravitation. For the planck scale I beleive that it is just a mathematical extrapolation but that we have not really this planck scale, it is an assumption that I tell , so I don t affirm of course but if my 3D spheres are correct, we can consider the 3 main systems that I explained, thespace coded and the 2 fuels, see that the orchestrated objective reduction becomes relevant in this reasoning for the fractal of consciousness.The gravitational Energies so become the keys because they are the consciousness in fact simplyThat implies relevances about the coherences and decoherences. The microtubules, these polymers becone so relevant to mimate if we consider the two main fuels and their motions , we can understand the coherences and decoherences and the distributions of Energies gravitational and the consciousness if we consider the good foundamental objects and the series towards this uniqueness.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 01:23 GMT
There is plenty of evidence to support near death experiences. None to support string theory, so you should chuck it in the waste basket for being a mathematical fantasy with no connection to reality.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 08:59 GMT
Jason, lol no I don t beleive in these things, like the tarot cards, and about the near death experiences I have told you that I have had a coma, and all can be explained with rationalism. Don t forget that the maths and the physics and sciences are the real language of this universe and that with the good partitions, we explain concrete rational things , of course we are limited still because we are youngs the humans still and our knowledges also have many limitations, but all can be explained in logic with this rationalism. I know that you beleive in ghosts, or others but these things have not been proved simply, it is probably ue to our imagination and past culture for me , the dont lie and permit to prove. Regards
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 15:29 GMT
Steve, you believe in things that don't exist, that nobody has ever seen! You believe in things that are not even rational! You believe in things that are not even coherent!
I put forth the explanation that some quantum fields can have consciousness and intelligence. You believe in... strings and spheres that have no resemblance to anything that is observed or the laws of physics.
So you should reserve your "lol" for your own lack of reason.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 15:43 GMT
you affirm things like always not proved Jason, you beleive in the ghosts, in your hyperdrive wich is for me pure nonsense, you beleive in tarot cards and astral ironical things, in fact I beleive that you are simply vanitious and jealous and don t accept the different points of vue, you want to insist on all your ideas and ideologies like the only one truth but in fact you have proved nothing,...
you affirm things like always not proved Jason, you beleive in the ghosts, in your hyperdrive wich is for me pure nonsense, you beleive in tarot cards and astral ironical things, in fact I beleive that you are simply vanitious and jealous and don t accept the different points of vue, you want to insist on all your ideas and ideologies like the only one truth but in fact you have proved nothing, you mix a little bit of all simply, the religions, after the gravitons, after the spiritual ghosts, in fact you have probably too much seen movies and you are not in the reality, you beleive that all what you imagine is true, but for me it is just an euphory spiritual, we tryy to explain you but you are persuaded that you are special with your fake qi of more than 300 like you told, in fact Jason you want to be what you are not simply and your vanity eats you instead to be rational and objective ands in making like all in studying the rational works, in fact I like you because I am like this I am an universalist and I love my fellowmen but you are odd in insisting on things totally odd, you critic Hwawking, Penrose and all the thinkers thinking differently , and me also because you are probably jealous I don t know, I find this sad, you destroy your credibility here on FQXi, all we try to explain you how acts the rationalism but you cannot change unfortunally, it is like if you are frustrated and want to prove something, all what you prove at this moment is extremist thoughts and assumptions not proved, you are not able to doubt and it is sad, all rational thinkers respect this , they doubt or prove by maths or experiments and you no, you affirm things nor proved in physics , in phhilosophy and even in the religions, it is odd really, now like you are vanitious like all you are going to be obliged still to answer, but be sure, make like all, don t affirm and be rational please. Penrose is one of the best and you critic his works and it is non sense. You have nor a general theory, nor a model concrete at this moment, you must learn more and study more I beleive dear Jedi of the Sphere, regards
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 15:58 GMT
be rational and logic please, we are on a platform where we discuss about concrete things and sciences, we are not on facebook Jason, FQXi is a wonderful platform and we must respect the works of persons, you affirm too much things not proved unfortunally and you don t doubt, the problem is there, me I tell this for you. You we doubt all here and we don t affirm our assumptions, we just discuss, we can have our own ideas and beleifs but no apparntly we cannot critic yours like the ghosts or the tarot cards or others, I don t underatand you sometimes Jason
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 16:38 GMT
Jason, the gravitons are not proved and found, the same for my 3D spheres or the strings or the points and a geometrodynamics, the BB is an assumption even with some interesting datas with the CMB , we don t know if we have a deeper logic before, and the GR can not be taken like the only one truth, so your idea is maybe sure for you but you have not proved your assumption simply, and you critic the superstrings and even if I don t agree with all, I can recognise the relevance of ranking of fields with the theory of witten and the strings, branes, Mtheory, I see just differently about these foundamental objects, you speak about the red shift and blue shift and this and that, but in fact all is an assumption, you speak about the reason but you are not reasonable in affirming things simply not proved, we are in the reality Jason , not in a movie inaginary you know, you must like all prove your ideas, me I make tyhe same , I don t affirm all my assumptions, I try to prove them and I can affirm you that when you work the maths, it is difficult because our actual unknowns are difficult to explain, for example you speak about the gravitons but what is your quantization and renormalisation of these particles of gravitationa, the weakest quantum force ? what are the foundamental objects and why , have you proved them ? no you haven t Jason, you speak about the reason but is it reasonbale to beleive in ghosts, in the tarot cards, the astral things or others and your affirmations religious? they are assumptions Jason even if you are persuaded
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 16:44 GMT
derivations of the GR, me I want well, I know what is a derivation or an integration but show us the mathematical tools and equations , how you unify this GR and the quantum gravitation, with what like foundamental objects and why and how do you deriuvate this GR , let s go, explain us in details , because you can tell all what you, without equations, it is not sufficient
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 16:47 GMT
so you reduce this GR and derivate it to reach these gravitons and you consider the photons in all this oscillating differently, ok , but how and why , it is just this that I ask. You consider so the luminiferous spacetime and a deeper gravitational photonic logic to explain with different oscillations these gravitons wich are photons, but how to resume ? what is a photon also for example, why they are what they are and what are their foundamental essence, I understand your idea, so you consider that the gravitation is the main chielf orchestra and so like me governs the photons and so this electronmagntism , I can understand but how and why , how to resume they balance this standard model, me I have encoded these particles of cold DM to balance , and you why these phjotons gravitation balance all this ?
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 16:56 GMT
I interpret the surface area of the expanding graviton to be a virtual or a real photon; the surface would be the electromagnetic field. Of course, a graviton might encounter a charged particle and get absorbed and drastically altered from a spherical shape. It is these built in features that are responsive to the potential term of the Schrodinger equation. I presume there are subtler features that have to do with creating standard model particles; although I advocate for the idea that it take many (perhaps a near infinite number) of gravitons to contain all of the degrees of motion necessary to make particle/antiparticle creation possible.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 19:34 GMT
What is a photon for you Jason in your imagination ? me I consider that it is a finite series of spheres 3D coded to be what they are distributing the heat and having properties to see due to light and they create the electromagntism and the GR, and the finite series have the dirac large number like the number of cosmol spheres that I have approximatelly calculated , and the cold dark matter is the same for the number but are different in the cold and for the gravitational properties.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 20:07 GMT
oK I can understand, so what is really a graviton in its pure foundamental essence ? for me it is just like a photon due to these finite series and turning in opposite sense and being in the cold and permitting the gravitation and the balance for this electronagnetism, both photons and gravitatons in my model are sent from the central cosmolog sphere , a kind of super matter creating all infornations, the space, te DM, the photons, and creating also the anti gravitational push, spherical the dark energy
The surface of an expanding graviton is a virtual photon, unless energized with E = HD, then it's a real photon. The interior of the graviton is filled with quantum states for position and momentum. Gravitons are carriers of the physics constants, they manifest accordingly. The overlap of gravitons make standard model particle fields available, as compared with Lisi's E8 crystals. Over time, gravitons get large enough that when they overlap, they become part of spacetime.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 2, 2020 @ 06:34 GMT
ok Jason, I see clearer , so you beleive a little bit that all come from fields and you consider points and geometrical algebras like the E8 to explain the rankings of fields, like Lisi and his E8, thanks for sharing
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 2, 2020 @ 07:04 GMT
Actually, Lisi's concept of E8 made me think of the overlap of a large number of gravitons, all between t = t1 and t = t2. When the big bang occurred, between 1 and 10 seconds, is the size range of the gravitons, r = ct1 to r = ct2, in which the lepton field is being generated. In other words, I think that each standard model particle field is created by gravitons between ct1 and ct2. When the gravitons get larger than that, they contribute to other kinds of fields.
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 2, 2020 @ 07:35 GMT
The idea is to create a set of laws of physics that are simple, "throw and forget". Just turn on the gravitons and let the laws of physics take care of themselves.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 2, 2020 @ 07:52 GMT
I like this E8 and I am in contact with the team of Klee irwin on facebook , he is the investor and Ray Aschien, Davide Chester, Lisi, Fang Fang and others are in this team , it is the quantum gravity research foundamention, I have discussed a lot and I can understand they like this E8, but like I said we dont know the real origin of this universe, we cannot affirm that all comes from the fields like if we had an infinite heat and after photons and after fields and oscillations inside connected with cosmic fields to create the topologies, geometries, matters and fields, all this is an assumption, the same for my 3D psheres, we don t know what are these foundamental objects and this philosophical origin, that said we could converge because they oscillate also these 3D spheres and are in motions rotations and in contact due to these aethers....if we affirm these things, it is odd for me , because we need proofs and nobody has proved these object and the origin unfortunally, but I love this E8 exceptional group for the mathematical beauty of symmetries ,
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 2, 2020 @ 08:10 GMT
I still like my idea that the first graviton had a surface area with a photon of Energy E = hf = hc/Lambda where lambda = 10^-98 meters, and the result was that the big bang occurred. The idea that gravitons expand between size ranges r1 and r2 for various particle fields makes everything so simple and clean. It would coincide with the Bible so cleanly that atheists will avoid this explanation until there is nothing else, and they are forced to consider it or risk not getting paid! LOL I swear to God!!! It looks like God created a god level game by making everything at maximum difficulty so it would take a really long time to complete. I believe that God is compassionate and loves us, but I also suspect that God wants something to pay attention to.
So is E8 compatible with the idea of overlapping gravitons of size ranges between r1 and r2 for each set of standard model particles?
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 2, 2020 @ 08:28 GMT
We are inside indeed a wonderful universal mechanics of evolution and we are free to interpret our unknowns like we want of course. We search simply answers to these unknowns, like I said I consider a thing coding and creating this physicality like an infinite eternal consciousness, you name it , God. I like the quantum consciousness of Penrose like in my model, it is the main energy and I consider that all is fractals of this energy , I see the distributions of this in these finite series of spheres, sent form this cosmological center, I told me , in fact if a thing creates codes and informations of evolution to imply this physicality, so we need a main transformator, that is why this center intrigues me, it is like a super matter of consciousness energy transformed and after this thing sent the codes to have a complexity of evolution and stable matters. Imagine that maybe it has taken an eternity to create this center able to create all kind of coded matters and energetical electromagnetic and gravitational particles , all is connected also due to fact that a kind of space disappears due to these series of the space and the two fuels, because when you utilise a specif fractal of 3D spheres, and in taking the central one the biggest volumes and after 3 smaller around for example and after 5 smaller around the 3 and we continue with this dirac large number, the space disappears....
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 16:09 GMT
the entropy Jason is a complex topic in details but simple generally, In thermo I suppose that you know, it is the calculation of disorder, for example we can calculate the energy disponible to make a work, see the relevance of the equation PV=nRT, and so S is the natural logarythm with the work of Boltzman if my memory is correct. We don t know all about the main codes like I said and so the disponible energy and so the real entropy universally speaking but it seems irreversible in the arrow of time. If we want to analyse the philosophy of this entropy, nobody knows really and we cannot affrim what is the secret after the death, but probably that there is someting indeed to analyse but we have limitations actual. We could maybe consider the electronagntism and work for the life and the death and correlate with the consciousness and a deeper interpretation of this gravitatipon, but we are not there actually,l we don t know simply, nor you nor nobody in fact, we have just assumptions and personal philosophical interpretations. See for example the life, the organism and the second law of thermo about the increasing entropy and that the Entropy is a function of the state of the system, so the change in entropy of a system is determined by its initial and final states. In the idealization that a process is reversible, the entropy does not change, while irreversible processes always increase the total entropy. You can extrapolate these ideas about the total entropy of the universe. An interesting analysis also is the theory of informations and the works of Shannon to see clearer...regards
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 16:43 GMT
You're right. Without direct observation, nobody knows for certain. Some phenomenon might be too subtle to be verified in an empirical way. In fact, there was a time when people didn't believe in special relativity! Some people still don't!
So, I agree with you that the philosophy of entropy is terribly misguided; it is sad that it led Boltzman to commit suicide. We should do a little more, as part of the scientific community, to remind people that entropy does not imply hopelessness any more than a Higgs field implies that non corporeal consciousness is proven by physics. Or maybe it does! Maybe entropy does imply hopelessness, and quantum fields do imply a non corporeal afterlife! Unreasonable skeptics will still doubt it, but again, there are people who don't believe in special relativity or a round earth!
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 17:07 GMT
imagine this, imagine that we have a continuity, in logic we loose our electromagntism and we continue on an other place inside this universe like all turns resynchronised, why we could have ghosts if the electromagnetism has disappeared ???? I have never seen ghosts and what I explain about my idea is an assumption, I beleive that maybe yes we could continue a road in being resynchronised in a correlated brain inside this universe, it seems maybe more logic than ghosts no ? Of course I don t affirm my ideas, we just speak, but frankly have you already seen a ghost you or have you already seen a proof ?? I suppose that experiments have been made and nothing has been found Jason, you are free of course to think like you want but nothing about the afterlife or the ghosts have been proved ....
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 17:45 GMT
Jason, in studying the works of Penrose and Hameroff, I have seen that they support the quantum consciousness, I consider the same in my model, I consider that all is a fractal of consciousness , so it is maybe the main foundamental energy , this infinite eternal consciousness , so you can understand my 4 aethers , with the aether of consciousness everywhere without physicality and after an aether of space without motions and after the two fuels, photons and cold Dark matter. These hypothesis of Penrose and others are at the begining but I like a lot these ideas searching the hard problem of consciousness and that converges with my ideas.These ideas are necessary because our classical quantum mechanics and its determinism cannot explain this consciousness. Max Tegmak also has interesting ideas about this topic in opposition with Penrose but it is a nice war if I can say, they search and it is the most important.The debates continue in fact and we search simply answers, Bohm also was relevant for his ideas, but we have like we know these philosophical limitations.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 17:57 GMT
All this to tell that we arrive at deep philosophical questions, we arrive at a new era even inside the sciences community, we can speak about things wich were not really well seen in the past inside the sciences community, my model and these spheres consider a continuity and I recognise that it beyond our human understanding still, the debates are interesting, we need to know more about this consciousness, the philosophy and the sciences can be harmonised but unfortunally we cannot actually.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 18:32 GMT
Jason see the relevance of coherences and decoherences and the works on microtubules about all this, Hameroff has made good extrapolations, that implies that we have a deeper logic than just this electromagnetism in logic but how , where, why, that becomes relevant if we consider that the consciousness is the main energy consider the aether that I explained , Penrose and Hameroof consider this quantum consciousness and I liked this idea a lot, because we could rank it and orchestrate it ....
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 18:33 GMT
I have tried to explain spirit as somehow related to quantum wavefunctions and virtual photons. But for my trouble, I have gotten resistance and irrational skepticism. Yet somehow I was able to unify quantum mechanics and relativity on my own by coming up with an expanding graviton model all while the physics community is still tinkering around with vibrating strings and loops, neither of which are compatible with big bang cosmology. I don't claim to have the skill or the intelligence to elevate my ideas to a mathematical level above calculus. Nevertheless, I can describe an experiment that could be performed by those who have sufficient skill. The physics community can't even do that!
So when you say that Tegemark has a model for consciousness that is the only way possible, I reply by stating that the wave function itself passes through all molecular biology, all chemistry; the wave function is the conduit between spirit/spiritual life AND molecular biology.
I am glad that the physics community is finally starting to catch up. But the fact that you claim empirical proof that ghosts don't exist or that God doesn't exist or aliens, just because you haven't bothered to pay close enough attention, your assertions require a level of credibility that that physics community just doesn't have.
The physics community used to have a lot of credibility. But when they spent all of that credibility and trust on convincing the public that God does not exist, aliens and ghosts don't exist, you all wasted your credibility.
Flashy physics equations about superstrings that don't exist is proof that you don't have a handle on fundamental reality!
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 1, 2020 @ 18:41 GMT
we are numerous inside this sciences community and we are not numerous to speak about these deep questions, all we have have different ideas and all we search answers and sometimes we agree , and sometines we are inm opposition with the philosophical ideas of scientists, that depends in fact. I like the ideas of Penrose and Hameroff I must say, I know that a big number also of scientists don t consider the spirituality and they have also their own ideas like this noise,they converge with the noise in computing but for me that will not give the answers nor for the quantum computing nor for the conciousness, but they are free to think like they want also.
Thanks for the nice lecture, and nice slides on a most important topic AI, Consciousness, Computation, and Physical Law
I’m a former Dutch lawyer, magistrate and D.A. who in order to help a client whose children were taken from her due to a IQ test, used my model on legal evidence and proof that my friend emeritus professor of statistics Richard Gill calls...
Thanks for the nice lecture, and nice slides on a most important topic AI, Consciousness, Computation, and Physical Law
I’m a former Dutch lawyer, magistrate and D.A. who in order to help a client whose children were taken from her due to a IQ test, used my model on legal evidence and proof that my friend emeritus professor of statistics Richard Gill calls “spot on” subsequently on the laws of physics. Predicting in effect in 2010 what later became known to me the existence of a dynamic crystal as being what I see as the Higgs field. My then model of the cosmos with predictions that were published in the Dutch NWA 2015. Other predictions such as that the energy packet of an un-polarized photon would show a cross, and as a yet to be found one a St Andreas cross.
The method is in effect evidence based medicine as it was originally intended. I.e. using my gut feelings as facts in the Bayesian formula. In a way in effect that David A. Schum describes in his book on probabilistic reasoning, for engineers. He uses murder cases as examples.
In effect I used reverse engineering seeing the evident physical deterministic order function of the cosmos as the same as that of our mammal brains that stem from symbiotic bacteria that we still even need today. Bacteria are quite evident robots. Well, in my model we still are. Robots akin what prof of neurology Dick Swaab says we are. Yet robots that axiomatically baring magic and absolute proof must go for the Bayesian inverse: we do have a free will and there is a meaningful goal to be constructed.
Gödel was indeed wrong, for the formula of Pierre Laplace that was used by reverend Thomas Bayes is an all mathematics encompassing paradoxical niche affair. A Socratic Yin and Yang Harry Potter formula only to be used for education and humour. For the formula rules itself out for being too cumbersome. For as complex as needed yet as simple as possible is the rule of correct science.
It works both probabilistic and deterministic and is thus the only formula that can correctly and fully describe the workings of our synapse in our brain. From absolute true to absolute untrue and absolutely all positions in between.
Assuming axiomatically that everything including the stamp collecting is physics then mathematics is part of physics. Even a thought is something and not nothing. In my model I follow Louis Carroll in that we need five and not four axioms in mathematics or else we end up in Alice in Wonderland. Two parallel lines don’t cross even in infinity is needed in my model for describing the vector of the Son (graviton?) particle and other two particles as the constructs atomos in an absolute non curved nothing of infinite space filled with an infinite amount of atomos.
Defining said order function of the cosmos as the physical soul of the cosmos describable in deterministic mathematics automatically shows that the soul of the CPU of our brain must be the same order function and thus same soul. Ergo the Bayesian formula is already part of the Law of Everything. Thus per logical definition all that is inconsistent with Bayes is pseudoscience. Bayes is thus not trivial as prof. Gill takes it to be.
Also Einstein was right in my model: God doesn’t play dice.
Our mini cosmos world presents itself to us only in a probabilistic way. Physicists forgot their instrument between their ears as published by me NWA 2015. Now my block model of the brain has been tested in practice and that too works very practically like a gem in several court cases as with a recent murder case.
The way this model works is akin the way Leonardo da Vinci predicted the parachute. An intuitive affair in which Leonardo is via this model seen not as a genius yet as a normal 1/125 healthy ADHD-c4m affair who had the time and money to think and whose idea’s weren’t lost to humanity. Einstein is a 1/500 healthy ADHD-i 4m affair. Who were both helped no doubt by others. Einstein by his first wife.
The block model with Bayes show the fundamental human rights and how we humans are all absolute idiots that can’t understand each other. We need to learn to cooperate in blind valid trust via learning and training our brains in order to know how our brains work, and by knowing how to identify your correct teammates or go extinct.
With this the Bayesian formula is thus already part of the Law of Everything.
I claim this Bayesian Block-model ZIEL proves:
• Humans can’t think properly when not teamed up according to the block model and have due to their upbringing and education learnt sufficient Bildung as lived thru minimum general knowledge. A fundamental human right being thus easily achievable excellent education in a correctly formed team of teachers and students.
• Humans can’t think properly when they aren’t allowed to play along for a decent wage as a function of the GNP of the community they belong to, as long as they behave themselves.
• Infringement is slavery and thus forbidden as are all undue infringements on fundamental human rights. Being the latter physics. I.e. human physics. We are robots with inherent shortage of memory space. Robots that must assume to have a meaning to life and a free will. Get this wrong and the system will get more and more overstressed and fail in a Dr Ingo Piepers style WWIII. I can’t disprove Ingo that his physics of war shows that war is nigh, so this is urgent!
I hope I can get the two English versions of the block model and model of the cosmos posted in the documents. It will be some time before I've edited my site.
Georgina Woodward replied on Sep. 3, 2020 @ 01:36 GMT
Hi Gerhard,
What is "to think properly"? Is that your own definition of what proper thought is, or from someone else's philosophy?
Isn't there some usefulness for people who can think improperly? By which I mean opposing approved group think? Potentially opening up new ways of operating/new directions and preventing stagnation.
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 3, 2020 @ 05:32 GMT
"Infringement is slavery and thus forbidden as are all undue infringements on fundamental human rights. " This statement reminds me of my brother's ex wife who once said that "tickling is literally torture". You have to be mindful of extreme statements or they can lead you to insanity, lead you to make a cascade of choices that are harmful to others in some other way you hadn't thought of.
"We are robots with inherent shortage of memory space. Robots that must assume to have a meaning to life and a free will. Get this wrong and the system will get more and more overstressed and fail in a Dr Ingo Piepers style WWIII. "
We are certainly souls who inhabit a biological body. It is true that there are limits to our cognitive function that if exceeded, can result in an unhappy life. We all want to live happy lives if possible! We should take care of one another, but also respect each other's wishes.
Please each other? Ourselves? Please God? So many choices! I honestly think we can do all three if we pray, ask for help from the Spirit World.
I d be happy and honored if a person like you could support my project GLOBAL COLLABORATION on FQXi, I need persons like you , authorities and you have probably very relevant ideas to convice the UN with concrete innovative solutions where all wins, alone we are nothing, this project is very important for me, we must try to change this planet with sciences and consciousness,
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Sep. 5, 2020 @ 13:16 GMT
Hi all,
I have understood nature and properties of three states of mind (sub conscious, conscious and superconcious)I think the physical and mathematical aspect of superconcious state of mind can be real theory of everything!!but it is extremely hard! To develop algorithm and technology for superconcious state of mind is also tedious job!I am writing article on three states of mind! I think it will be quite useful regarding our job!I will let everyone know when I will finish that article!
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 6, 2020 @ 07:55 GMT
I think we should go back to the cosmic paradigm where we are souls who reincarnate into a world that was created by God. Basically a little bit Judaeo-Christian, a little bit spiritualism. Let's just learn to love one another.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 6, 2020 @ 08:40 GMT
are you sure that you encircle the love, I doubt, you don t show a real tolerance and universal love , we see a lot of hate probably due to jealousy and frustration, it is so a fake spiritual christianity, you don t really encicle his message I believe, all what you want is to satisfy your ego, you are not an altruist fo me, but you could prove maybe that I am false, you must improve your soul, it seems not sufficient, the paradigm is there, evolve
Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 7, 2020 @ 23:35 GMT
C'mon Steve! Stop prevaricating! How much evidence had to be thrown out that would have proved that the Spiniza god and Universalism is real?
Because I can tell you! People like YOU threw out millions of testimonials of near death experiences and contact with the Creator-God, and with family and loved ones.
How much "science credibility" did you have to borrow to make your Spinoza god respectable!
Hameroff and Penrose have very well worked about this consciousness and the cognitive sciences and the fact to try to unify this neurocomputing and this quantum computing, the secret is there, of course it becomes very complex because we don t know these foundamental mathematical and physical objects , but we can try to converge with the good mathematical tools, a partition exists with these foundamental objects, their geonetries, topologies, fields and properties and the microtubules, like Hameroff told, this consciousness is a deep mystery and the quantum consciousness becomes the key, the fact to conscier that the main primordial energy is conscious seems the key but how is distributed all this inside this physicality , the secret is there, what abiout singularities also tha main codes, it is a big unknown in fact , but we approach all days. I read a relevant paper of Hameroff , Quantum mathematical cognition requires quantum brain biology, it is very relevant, and the links with the free will seems essential also and why the rationalism seems to order the encodings, it is maybe the secret to heal the mental sickness due to disorders in brains and a lack of rational sortings, the infornations are too much in disorder for the schizophenia or psychotic comportments, we arrive at this psychology and the education and environments and of course the encodings with the sortings, superimposings and synchros. That implies so a questipon, how we encode and synchronise or sort these informations and why the memory stabilise them and why they permit to extrapolate the ideas and adaptations to our environments with our observations..... that becomes it seems to me a key if we find these foundamental objects.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 11, 2020 @ 18:55 GMT
the amino acids seem the keys also if we understand well their properties and excitations, they become foundamental like they are in all cells, the tryptophan is intriguing , they are encoded and we retrun about these encodings and if the quantum spheres, coded also are essential and foundamental objects, we can find several interesting link for these electronic excitations , the electron phonon and thermal links become interesting also and the works of Schrodinger, that implies in my model a relevance if this DM cold is encoded in nuclei and that we have this fith force, and the 3 aethers, we have codes encodings and the question is why and how , these microtubules need to be better understood and the secret seems to converge with the neural computing and quantum computing these transferts of energy and informations and so we need these foundamental objects ands the two fuels, photons and cold dark matter more the main codes , the space. All this puzzle becomes so complex seen the numbers of these finite series of 3D coded spheres and and all the amino acids and others in the brains, The coherences and decoherences seem essential and so the entropy and negentropy due to these 2 fuels in resume.
Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 01:04 GMT
Consider this Jason Mark Wolfe...
Scientists attempt to hold themselves to the highest standards of intellectual investigation, which requires either evidence-based proofs or sound logical deduction - so Physics tends to be empirical or mathematical. It is unsound to label scientists as deficient, for failing to grasp a truth that may not be in evidence.
You may have individual experiences that convince you God is real and palpable. In this you may be lucky, or cursed, because it's not like the fact you have seen God rubs off or touches everyone else in a way that makes God palpable for them. Then there is this "You claim to have the direct experience of the Divine; so what does it do for you, and how do we know?"
In the movie "Dr Strange" there was a character Jonathan Pangborn who decided not to delve further into the Mystic Arts, but instead to return to a normal life. I was such a student once; and then decided that learning to visit other dimensions could help me understand Physics better. It turned out to be true and it is especially applicable in Quantum Gravity.
On the other hand; I would never expect you or anyone to believe that I have visited with the Godhead in the highest place, or whatever. To be honest; it has been a long time since I took anyone on a grand tour journey like the Ancient One did for Strange when he first came to Kamar Taj. And one of the 3 people I so guided passed away back in July. So the evidence dwindles. The evidence for mystic travels is in the experiences themselves Jason.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 07:58 GMT
Hi Jonathan, it is sure that we cannot affirm to know these things, of course we are all free to think like we want but the fact to affirm to know deep assumptions is not really rational. It is well explained what you have told,
Even with these experiences we must follow the evidence based journey in science. The 'religion' of science is to doubt, and it doubts even evidences, much more pure beliefs without evidence.
Great experiences may give you clues to follow, like some intuitive path, but they are never themselves Truths. You have to do the lessons yourself.
The negative side of blind belief is sometimes well seen. Sadly so.
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 15:26 GMT
Thanks for chiming in Ulla...
She is right; Science is about doubt. Rightly defined; belief is nothing more than a feeling of certainty that some premise is true. And also; inner experiences can guide us, but we have to test the veracity of any messages received inwardly through intuition or other means. Only when experience on the inner also finds clear expression in the outside world can we say that it means something.
But I also have to warn the skeptics. It is NOT about whether inner journeys or messages from outside normal perception are feasible or reasonable. Instead; it is all about the usefulness or applicability of what we learn. Just because certain things are perceived in our imaginations does NOT mean it is all only imaginary. Those experiences are real enough. But your imagination could be showing you what might happen, not what is real, or something like that.
On the other hand; if what you imagine is something that can be logically proved and finds expression in the real world; then it starts to look more like Science and less like a dogmatic Religion based on beliefs. Sadly though; too often scientific work is based on dogma too.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 15:42 GMT
sure, without doubting ,we must doubt :) I make the same for all my model and its assumptions and I search to prove them, that makes me crazy even dear Jonathan lol, It is like this that the sciences are , only the proved laws, axioms, equations, facts are accepted and we cannot deny them. On the other side we cannot affrim assumptions, models , ideas not proved by rigourous proofs or experiments, it is odd, that is why I love this paper of Wilczek but I doubt because it is not proved that the gravitons exist first of all and that they are the quanta of gravitational waves, I make the same for my model of quantum gravitation I have reached it but I work for the rigourous mathematical proofs, it lacks still several things where I have difficulties , the problem is the scales and the foundamental objects, I am not sure. But generally that goes , I have quantified it.
The imagination and the intuition are important, they permit with the tools in physics , sciences and maths to play and create ideas, models but we are limited and the fact to doubt is foundamental. I have thoughts about your octonions, they are beautiful mathematical tools and I consider this E8 in considering these 3D spheres and series finite and the dirac large number instead of points or strings in this exceptional group, and I superimpose 3 E8 , one for the space vacuumm the DE, and the 2 fuels the photons ands the cold dark matter, so E8XE8XE8 and 3D spheres where the space disappears , that implies 3 main aethers and a superfluidity .
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Sep. 22, 2020 @ 07:25 GMT
Hi all,
I just read that there are 64 dimensions in the universe and God resides in 65th
Dimension according to indian philosophy! Also there are number systems, which are real, imaginary, quaternions, octonions,and sedenions which are in the order of 2^n! If we go beyond sedenions number system,then ultimate reality can be described,but according to Cayley dackson's construction we can not go beyond that!I think this post is debatable and can be useful!so I always say philosophy and science should go hand in hand to solve mysteries of universe and reality!
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Sep. 23, 2020 @ 18:39 GMT
It sounds like...
You must be talking about the E8 x E8 universe theory of John Hagelin. While the octo-octonions do have more than a passing interest for me; I would put my money on a different formulation. It sounds like you want to put God just out of reach rather than inside of creation Prasad. Is that right?
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 07:05 GMT
Dear Jonathan,
I recently read after sedenions come trigintaduonions! Has trigintaduonions formulated yet? Can we extend Cayley Dickson's construction to trigintaduonions and beyond that? Which will come as 64th dimension! Please answer!
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Sep. 27, 2020 @ 01:06 GMT
Adding dimensions won't necessarily get you more space or options...
If you study the higher-d spheres, you find that (hyper-) volume tops out in 5-d and (hyper-) surface area in 7-d. On the other hand, 24-d can be shown to be the most compact, in terms of sphere extents and close packing.
Then there is optiony. The octonion sphere S7 has 28 possible smooth or differential structures, while the sedenion sphere S15 has 16256. Since S1 through S6 have only one possible structure that makes them cool somehow.
If you study the fibrations of S15, you find it only breaks down into S7, S3, and S1 - for the octonion, quaternion, and complex numbers. So the 16-d sedenions get you to the point of having only the generative or evolutive algebras.
What extra benefit do you imagine 64-d gets us Prasad?
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Sep. 27, 2020 @ 04:46 GMT
Dear Jonathan,
Thanks for your comment!
That means if we go in higher dimensions , lower dimensions must be satisfied!
Just like when Yogi's goes in higher dimensions through mediation lower dimensions are purified! but what could be the logic behind that?is it 8 factorial?
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Sep. 30, 2020 @ 02:29 GMT
You'll like this...
The geometric figures and algebras go through a rotation with a period of 8 called the Bott periodicity. So similar structure appears over and over in higher dimensions, if you index by 8.
My take is that higher-d structures do affect our 3-d reality in 4-d spacetime, because cosmological transitions implement a dimensional reduction process which results in the present day dimensionality.
I look to simultaneous bottom-up and top-down processes to effect convergence.
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 30, 2020 @ 11:05 GMT
Hi To both of you,
Dear Jonathan. I love this theorem of Bott, and the homotopy groups of spheres and when we link the poincare conjecture proved by Perelman, that becomes relevant in considering also this E8 if we replace the points of strings by these finite primoridal series of 3D spheres having oddly in my calculations the dirac large number if we consider the number of cosmological spheres , we can even link the topological and euclidian spaces and the K theory. The homomorphisms become interesting to analyse. Several mathematical tools can be added also like the lie groups of course and derivatives more links with the works of Clifford. I beleive also that we can make a kind of conjecture with the D branes, strings and the Mtheory , superstrings in focusing in a pure 3D like a foundamental ,and in fractalising simply the scales with these mathematical tools. An other relevance is to consider the symplectic works , and symplectomorphisms. We can rank many things at my humble opinion. Regards
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Sep. 30, 2020 @ 20:14 GMT
It's like an infinite ladder....
Lower-d form extends into the higher-d and higher dimensional form projects onto the lower dimensions. But that way the shape of the scaffolding (Math itself) influences the shape of reality. Fun Stuff!
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Sep. 30, 2020 @ 13:14 GMT
Hi all,
i have two comments regarding existence of universe!
1:i think universe came into existence from point like intial singularity and ends into black hole singularity,this process repeats therefore universe is cyclic!
2:i think everything came into existence (matter,light,gravity and like that)from point like intial singularity ,and this physical world was formed!
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 7, 2020 @ 09:26 GMT
Hi John, have you seen his words, I beleive a little bit the same with this Big bang, I see differently but I consider a deeper logic also, Penrose said this
“The Big Bang was not the beginning. There was something before the Big Bang and that something is what we will have in our future.
“We have a universe that expands and expands, and all mass decays away, and in this crazy theory of mine, that remote future becomes the Big Bang of another aeon."
I'm looking forward to the articles that will certainly follow, and the discussions that ensue. There has not been much in the news media yet and I haven't browsed the scientific journals, but from the snippets I am also quite curious to hear more of Andrea Ghez and her mathematical perspective. She is only the 4th woman to share in a Nobel and it is worth noting that many of the women whom are successful these days in pursuing careers in physics and cosmology are more likely to be found in Relativistic and gravitational studies and research than in the statistical world of QM. A short take of her on the network news gives a hint; she remarked that one of the intriguing things about Black Holes is that Time and Space become 'mixed'. And!... there arises the physical distinction between SR and GR where the notion of Time 'stopping' in a gravitational well is quite the contrary to Einstein's SR gedanken of time coming to a stop at light velocity. There should be some good discussions coming. :-) jrc
well... that IS General Relativity isn't it? It isn't like watching the ripples from tossing a pebble into a still pond, it's more like taking the pebble out of the pond to make room for the space that would be there if the pebble hadn't been present in the first place. And of course, if the pebble had been present, and still is, and space still needed the room, there would have to be Time for there to be any Present. Where Penrose is focused is on the nagging issue of a singularity, which is inherent to the assemblage of maths in GR. Mass Density is treated as the average of the estimable mass in the observable macro-realm object, that would be essentially an idealized sphere determined from the measurement of its disc diameter and in massive objects would be the light refracting boundary of the electrostatic separation of atomic masses in aggregate. The mathematical census of estimable size begins with those rough measurements. BUT... average would also be a constant density throughout the sphere which physically is known not to be the case in stellar objects. That 'averaging' along with the 'vanishing infinitesimals' in differential tensor calculus, inevitably fore-ordains a mathematical singularity in consequence. SO... the issue actually is that a constant density would not necessarily be the average density of a ponderable body (I like Einstein's use of that descriptive), and reasonably, if that constant density were proportionate to the total mass, it would naturally be greater than an averaged density in a core volume, and there would be enough mass left over to fill out the boundary of the idealized sphere in a continuous gradient. And on and on we go. :-) jrc
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 8, 2020 @ 09:00 GMT
:) yes indeed it is the general relativity and a few number understand really this GR unfortunally , I liked how you speak about it and the pebble. Penrose tries to understand the singularities and it is foundamental indeed , we search to understand what they are really, we retrun about the main origin and main codes still and always and unfortunally we don t know and we can just analyse at this moment with the tools that we have the effects in this GR but like I told you , if we have a deeper logic considering the stability of our spacetime and that we must superimpose something to balance the pressure of photons, so all becomes different and need this superimposing of hidden variables. See that the densities and the complexity of spheres become interesting to analyse and why we have different spheres and mass ..... why they are what they are and are stabl in our spacxetime that we observe actually ? why they become what they are like the satrs, planets and others, the BHs are more than we can imagine and I consider that this DM cold is dirrectly correlated with them, have you already thought about this John ? if this matter non baryonic exists, so what produce them ? Regards
Yes, I have given thought to non-baryonic dark matter. Let me begin with Maxwell's determination:
c = sqrt ( 1/ mu x epsilon ) because (mu x epsilon) would be -c^2 ! and there is no such mathematical thing as a sqrt of a negative number. If we take permeability and permittivity to be literally physical, not as separate measurable effects, than both physical conditions would...
Yes, I have given thought to non-baryonic dark matter. Let me begin with Maxwell's determination:
c = sqrt ( 1/ mu x epsilon ) because (mu x epsilon) would be -c^2 ! and there is no such mathematical thing as a sqrt of a negative number. If we take permeability and permittivity to be literally physical, not as separate measurable effects, than both physical conditions would coexist in an electromagnetic field. So it naturally (mathematically) follows that to be consistent quadratically, if we can (and universally do) accept c = sqrt ( 1/ mu x epsilon ) ; then we must also accept the physical existence of c^4 = ( mu x epsilon )^2 .
This goes a long way to rationalize both SR and e = mc^2 . The reasoning being that ( mass x c^4 ) would of course be equivalent to a quantity of energy, but would be a spatial constraint to four dimensions of Space and Time. Hence it would be a Density value of that equivalent energy relative to e = mc^2. And that argues well as a proportional upper density bound of any discretized, inertially bound quantity of energy whether we measure it as an energetic response or as a gravitational response we associate with mass.
From this it can be postulated that; for any mass to exhibit inertia, some portion of the total quantity of mass must exist at that proportional upper density bound. And if we also postulate that energy density varies in direct inverse proportion to velocity, that postulated proportional density would be absolute at rest and vary with the state of motion of the mass. So as the full range of density in an inertially bound field would vary with velocity, the lower density bound could not become less because it would already be at its limit of inductive reactance. The relative reduction of density across the range of density variation in the full field in response to velocity, could be expected to follow a Lorentz Invariance progressively towards the upper density but would limit to c, not infinity; [ c sqrt ( 1 - ( v^2 / c^2 ) ]. The lower density ranges suffering the higher proportional reduction in density.
This provides a generalized definition of inertia qualifying the operational truism that a mass in motion tends to remain in motion and a mass at rest tends to remain at rest. The proportional upper density would be definitive of the mass and translate inertia throughout the discrete mass relative to velocity regardless of state of motion.
So in this scheme of things, non-baryonic dark matter is the physical density requisite proportion in aggregate mass concentrations that translates inertia of that concentration across the domain range of combined gravitational fields, and may explain the 'flat hat' velocity curve observed in rotation of galaxies.
I hope that was concise enough without becoming incomprehensible. cheers jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 8, 2020 @ 15:01 GMT
It is comprehensible , you play with the mass, the inertia in respecting the permitivity and permeability , and you consider this relativity like the main chief orchestra and so you derivate the mass to differenciate the baryonic or non baryonic matters, it is a good general analysis, but like I told and with my equation, if this GR is not the main piece and the photons also and the special relativity , so all is different. In fact we have many different theories at this moment, the reasoning that you have made or the modified newtonian mechanics or my reasoning or others in playing with the GR , strings and the geometrical algebras. We need to know more about all this, we must find these particles and understand their properties , it will be easier I beleive , the LHC tries also to find them with different experiments, they consider also that this matter is encoded in nuclei. I beleive that the densities are important but the thermodynamics also and this heat ans thermo maybe need to understand better this cold and a kind of fractal near this zero absolute, that can explain many unknowns like this DM, this quantum gravitation and this anti matter, for me they are linked these unknowns, and we must not unify the QM and GR , but all. And this Dark energy also seems important like an anti gravitational system permitting to balance the two other systems that I explained and frutghermore that explains the evolution, it is the meaning of my theory in fact the spherisation of the universe...
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 8, 2020 @ 16:42 GMT
You know John, the real secret is to understand this mass and why we have two matters , one baryonic and one non baryonic, we know that the higgs mechanism create a field and it is nor a field of matter, nor a field of gauge, it is a scalar of course with a neutral charge an, d the other not neutral, we have if my memory is correct 4 degrees of freedom, so all this to tell that this vacuum coded energetical in my model takes all its meaning to give the mass, it is not the higgs really wich give the mass but this DE coded vacuum , the higgs permit to give a field wich permit to mass to emerge, it is different, so it appears due to thismechanism but the higgs is just a parameter permiiting to mass to appear, it does not give really the mass because it exists already , it is just like a kind of distrobution of a mass due to fields, like a music , the gamuts exists but the music appear when we play if you understand me in a simplistic analysis. So all this to tell that the mass emerges due to these bosons and fields. The same for the matter non baryonic but with a different logic and if we consider this cold dark matter and the quantum gravitation correlated, we can consider the soin 2 of particles of gravitation permitting the mass non baryonic to appear but we cannot measure it because it is beyond our measurements actually, that is why my equation becomes relevant with the two other systems superimposed.See also that we must complete the forces and their mass, not only the weak forces of our standard model, that becomes inetresting to analyse deeper the other mechanisms to superimpose and the potential and the scalars.The broken gauge symmetries are more complex than just our actual higgs mechanism- The lagrangian and the freedom degrees need to be better understood in superimposing this cold DM and the DE for me , that will permit to reach unknowns.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 8, 2020 @ 16:51 GMT
all this to tell that in fact in my model we have finite series of 3D spheres like I told and that these series come from this central cosmological sphere and it is a supermatter and so these series are coded and the codes are in this vacuum, and after the properties of mass and gravitationa and electrongantism appear when they merge and so that becomes relevant when we consider that the fielsds like the higgs permit to these codes to imply these peoperties like the mass in function of main codes of this vacuum, so the fields are just a fuel permitting to the matter to emerge with the codes that this vacuum distribute simply. The higgs mechanisms so is just a part of the problem of mass , it is a scalar permitting the emergence like a synchros with the field of vacuum made of coded particles.
agreed, in fact there are probably more theories than there are people! But in my own preference, I don't see mass as any secret. The higgs boson does not 'give' mass to other particles. The Higgs mechanism is a Quantum Mechanical regime which IF it holds statistcally true enough, enables mass to be identifiable in all subluminal particle species.
We measure mass directly as a gravitational response. Yet underlying all is the lack of a general definition of inertia. And a generalized predictable quantifiable definition for inertia as I have laid out, then allows hypotheses that would be reasonably falsifiable experimentally, to qualify what we measure gravitationally and what we measure as energy to be differentiated as physical properties that exhibit characteristics of specific densities. Mass, strictly speaking as a gravitational response would require a minimum upper density bound that would be inelastic... a 'hard' core of a full unitary field. And this has long been done with scattering observations and analysis. And the only rationalization possible for referring to an inertially bound quantity of energy we call a photon as being a 'massless' particle, would be that its proportionate upper density bound is lesser than a density which exhibits the characteristic of inelasticity. But that's my gig, and now I've got to take advantage of the last few days of decent weather before the autumn wet spell sets in. :-) jrc
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 8, 2020 @ 19:22 GMT
agreed also, It is well said and lol you are right there are so many theories now , we are in a crisis inside the theoretical sciences community, maybe the simplicity is the answer , all roads don t go to Roma if I can say :) but some roads that said converge , we cannot turn in round ....
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 9, 2020 @ 11:28 GMT
John, here is an abstract about the proof of the Riemann Penrose inequality,
We prove the Riemannian Penrose Conjecture, an important case of a conjecture [41] made by Roger Penrose in 1973, by defining a new flow of metrics. This flow of metrics stays inside the class of asymptotically flat Riemannian 3-manifolds with nonnegative scalar curvature which contain minimal spheres. In particular, if we consider a Riemannian 3-manifold as a totally geodesic submanifold of a space-time in the context of general relativity, then outermost minimal spheres with total area A correspond to apparent horizons of black holes contributing a mass A/16π−−−−−√, scalar curvature corresponds to local energy density at each point, and the rate at which the metric becomes flat at infinity corresponds to total mass (also called the ADM mass). The Riemannian Penrose Conjecture then states that the total mass of an asymptotically flat 3-manifold with nonnegative scalar curvature is greater than or equal to the mass contributed by the black holes.
The flow of metrics we define continuously evolves the original 3-metric to a Schwarzschild 3-metric, which represents a spherically symmetric black hole in vacuum. We define the flow such that the area of the minimal spheres (which flow outward) and hence the mass contributed by the black holes in each of the metrics in the flow is constant, and then use the Positive Mass Theorem to show that the total mass of the metrics is nonincreasing. Then since the total mass equals the mass of the black hole in a Schwarzschild metric, the Riemannian Penrose Conjecture follows.
We also refer the reader to the beautiful work of Huisken and Ilmanen [30], who used inverse mean curvature flows of surfaces to prove that the total mass is at least the mass contributed by the largest black hole.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 9, 2020 @ 12:07 GMT
Interesting when we consider the density theorem and the positive mass theorem, that becomes relevant in the general relativity considering the gravitating objects , the differential geometry and partial differential equations become important in the minkowski spacetime, I try to superimpose my model with the energetical vacuum and the series finite of spheres like explained before with the main codes in this vacuum and the two fuels. An hamiltonian deeper than just for this GR in logic can be made but I need help, it is not easy alone with the mathematics. What I must do is to consider the spinors with the 3D spheres and correlate with the electric and magnetic charges and the rotations oscillations motions of these 3D quantum spheres , the aim is to rank the concepts of mass differently, one for the special relativity, one for the general relativity, and for the others also like explained with the two other aethers. That can give the answers for the BHs not only at the event horizons and their effects gravitational and others, but we can know what they are really farer because we must unify all , the GR and the QM but also the DE and DM and quantum gravitation and anti matter , philosophically the consciousness also and singularities but it is an other story still lol.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Oct. 7, 2020 @ 11:40 GMT
Hi all,
I think universe may have came into existence from point like intial singularity and ends in black hole singularity! This process repeats as universe is cyclic!
Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Oct. 8, 2020 @ 19:34 GMT
May it please the reader...
I can boast of being published in the same volume with Sir Roger. He never got to Paris during that conference, but we were both presenters at FFP11, only he was a plenary speaker and I was a lowly plebe. See the following.
Georgina Woodward replied on Oct. 12, 2020 @ 04:02 GMT
The question seems off topic. However I think the answer is tied up in what we think 'to exist' means. There is a difference between material existence, things which have substance, and volume, or being and are able to be at a singular time compared to energy of all kinds that does not have a body of its own but is change or potential for change of substantial things, it is or happens over time. Things with mass exist (at Uni-temporal Now), energy happens.
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission
Georgina Woodward replied on Oct. 13, 2020 @ 00:03 GMT
To put it another way: Materially existent things, substance, being are like nouns. Energy is like verbs, designating doing of some kind; moving, flowing, vibrating and so on. Potential energy is like adjectives, designating the condition of the noun thing; Like primed, compressed, raised and so on. Verbs and adjectives apply to something else other than themselves.
PRASAD RAMESH DIVATE wrote on Oct. 13, 2020 @ 06:34 GMT
dear georgina,
nice explanation!
i think intial energy may have came from from absolute source of energy for very small interval of time!some people say that it was already there but how can there be something from nothing?
is it eternal consciousness?
if universe is created through thru big bang then what powers big bang?
it is never ending hierarchy!
i think science is unable to explain this! we will have to go for philosophy for that
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 13, 2020 @ 10:35 GMT
Hi Georgina, Prasad, we must recognise that all this is beyond our understanding , we can have our own philosophical interprtations but we don t know really. It d be odd to affirm to know the truth, why we have this universe, and from waht, what is this energy indeed ? and why we have this evolution also and informations and matters energy transformations, what is the real origin of our universe,, have we something before this BB, and if yes what is it ? and before this physicality , what is this energy transformaing ?? are we a mathematical accident, have we an infinite eternal consciousness creating codes and informations , we don t know but a sure thing all this is fascinating . More we learn, more we are aware to know so few.I consider personally an infinite eternal consciousness , it is my choice to think like this and it is due to my studies, learning probably but I don t affirm simply.Maybe simply this thing was alone since an eternity and create a thing beyond our understanding, the relevance is the optimisation improvement and maybe we create a thing simply evolving and our consciousness are tools. We are probably youngs even still.
Georgina Woodward replied on Oct. 14, 2020 @ 01:21 GMT
Hi Steve, you ask ,"what is this energy indeed?" I think my characterization of energy is reasonable, There is no need or evidence that it is a different kind of substance, of itself. Some might argue that electromagnetic radiation (EMr) has no medium. but travels through the void, so must be something of itself. My opinion is that there can not be waves in a true void. The void must contain a base medium that allows EMr to travel through it. It is not required by General relativity but that does not mean it does not exist. That its distribution is altered around large masses causing curvature of light paths is some evidence for it. Using curvature of the space-time mapping to explain the cause makes less sense to me.
Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Oct. 15, 2020 @ 13:13 GMT
I like Georgina's definition...
Energy is more like a verb than a noun. It is the tendency for things to change in a particular way, and the source of a force to effect change, but it is not a thing in the same way a rock or an atom is. We may give energy a quantity, but this is more like determining how much liquid is in a vessel than knowing what kind of liquid it is. We know that energy can be stored and that it flows like a liquid does - always seeking a lower level or potential - but energy is not of itself or only a collection of electrons or photons. Energy is the impulse or impetus to vary, and while it shapes all the noun-like things, or causes them to move, it remains more elusive and verb-like.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 15, 2020 @ 13:43 GMT
Yes it is a good definition, the matters and energy are correlated, Imagine if this reasoning is correct about the 3 main finite series of 3d spheres, the space vacuum for the main codes and the two fuels the photons and the cold dark matter and if we have this super matter at this central cosmological sphere sending these informations, now imagine the topologies, geometries and properties of matters appearing in function of the distribution, if the cold and heat play together in function of codes of this space , so we can understand the liquid, solid, gas in function of codes and so the stabilities of matters , the solids so for the geometries become relevant considering the stability , the thermodynamics with the cold and heat seem foundamental at all scales ....
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 15, 2020 @ 13:48 GMT
the energy becomes a philosophical and physical concept so in this line of reasoning, my idea intuitive is that before this physicality we had an infinite energy that we cannot define and I consider it like an infinite eternal consciousness, imagine now that this thing was alone and has created during an eternity this super matter and so the concept of matter energy becomes intriguing with these two fuels that I explained, the energy is foundamental but inside the physicality it is just a fuel, and the matters becomes the main thing, all this intrigue me a lot , my idea differs of strings and the fact that we have just photons and strings inside oscillating.In all case the energy was the main thing but this matter also considering philosophically my reasoning....the physicality is one thing, the energy beyond an other, and this central cosmological sphere becomes more than intriguing.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 15, 2020 @ 15:56 GMT
all this to tell that they are a little bit the same the matters and the energy generally considering this infinite energy having created with the energy this supermatter , it is paradoxal but they are transformed in function of codes of matters energy due to this space vacuum in my model of spherisation, the optimisation evolution of this universal sphere, the vacuum so is a matter and the two others are fuels energetical distributing the matters and properties more the energy permiting the motions.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 15, 2020 @ 19:34 GMT
You know dear all, I don t want to convice or change the lines of reasonings of thinkers, I just explain a different general philosophical origin creating our reality with its topologies, geometries, matters, fields, properties. In fact we know that all is a question to transform this energy infinite that we don t know beyond this physicality, I respect the idea of strings and these photons like if we had an infinite heat beyond, but we can think also beyond the box and try to consider a different energy than this infinite heat , we can consider a different energy beyond our understanding than a heat after all, the heat, the cold and others appear inside this physicality due to this supermatters of this center wich is a pure energy also paradoxally, and after it can distribute the differences simply due to the codes and the 3 Main finite series of 3D spheres having the same number than the dirac large number, the same than this cosmological finite series of cosm spheres. This energy is fascinating when we see all this physicality , the cold and heat and this space coded become very relevant seen the number of combinations and the distributions. The evolutive points of vue also is important like this center continues to send infornations, there is like an aim so , we create something in optimisation in logic and in complemantarity, it is there also that our consciousness is fascinating and the diversity of matters created.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 15, 2020 @ 20:03 GMT
Lol between us, you don t think that the fact to consider an infinite heat with all the interpretation , an accident mathematical or a kind of God or others is a little bit odd and this BB only ??? in 100 years of relativity , hop hocus pocus we have all understood with this SR and GR and hop now with Witten strings in 1D inside and hop the geometrical algebras of lie and hop we have understood all the topologies, geometries, fields... frankly for me , it is more than odd, this infinite energy is more than this and I don t affirm to know , but frankly we must go deeper and superimpose new parameters, these photons are just maybe a fuel permitting this life death, this electromagntism and the fact to observe and see due to light. Me I want well but I find all this so reductor considering our young age and our knowledges. The most impressing is that when you explain this, the thinkers have difficuklties to recognise this fact , probably due to vanity and the encodings or they don t like the innovative things, I don t know but it seems odd in my small belgian head. I am not sure about my theory and I doubt and try to prove like all, but I don t understand why the sciences community has difficulties to recognise that we know nothing still.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 16, 2020 @ 08:51 GMT
In fact , the energy and the matters inside this physicality have the same origin , they come from this thing beyond the physicality, this thing that we cannot define philosophically has transformed this energy and coded to create our universe, the matters and the energy at this central sphere in my model are complex and beyond our understanding, the E and the matters permit to create this reality , in logic the matters need the energy to emerge and these two fuels more the coded main space permit it . It is philosophical all this , the supermatter correlated with the physical transformed energy become the keys to distribute all this diversity and the most intriguing point is the evolution, there is something to analyse also about this evolution and why the atoms, particles are in evolution, some are stable and the complexity of links permit this evolution, I don t know why , but it needs some analysis to better understand this. It is the same for our emergent consciousness, why the lifes exist in fact, why we think and are in motions. All this is fascinating and the word is weak. We are in a kind of project in optimisation, what are we creating in fact, in my model of spherisation, the optimisation of the universal sphere, it is essential this evolution, we are probably duue to this consciousness tools of optimisation permitting to accelerate the process or to utilise correctly the tools around to improve what we can improve. The energy and the matters are the keys but we know so few about all this.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 16, 2020 @ 11:36 GMT
The energy is fascinating in fact , we know that it is a transfert to give a work , heat to our foundamental objects, in my model so these two fuels permit this with the main codes of this space vacuum that I consider from the dark energy. The motions appear so due to these fuels, the cold dark matter and the photons, so we can understand the work and the motions and the most important due to...
The energy is fascinating in fact , we know that it is a transfert to give a work , heat to our foundamental objects, in my model so these two fuels permit this with the main codes of this space vacuum that I consider from the dark energy. The motions appear so due to these fuels, the cold dark matter and the photons, so we can understand the work and the motions and the most important due to these main codes in this space energetical at low step , that create the diversities of topologies, geometries , the finite series of spheres also can be deformed with a kind of intrinsic ricci flow. We know that this distribution of energy is precise and cannot be destroyed , it is just a transfert and transformations, the newtonian mechanics for the work and forces become relevant and it is there that this quantum gravitation with the particles cold of Dark matter encoded are interesting like a gravitational force permitting the balances of our standard model and heat due to photons encoded giving the haet properties.A fith force appears also due to the series of quantum BHs cold also farer than our nuclear forces. The Energy beyond this physicality is not for me an infinite heat , but an infinite thing that we don t underdstand able to create with the woks and motions the matters and energy transformed following a precise system. The fact that this central cosmol sphere is a super matter paradoxally correlated with an energy is relevant because we can play with all the combinations. The mass and energy are related simply and the matters are the mass , and so the energy mass equivalence takes all its meaning.The potential and kinetic energies are fascinating considering these finite series of spheres if I am correct of course, and the 3 main finite series, imagine all the combinations permiting the physics, cheMistry, biology,cosmology and the evolution when we consider also this consciousness infinite like main energy beyond this physicality. This energy needs a center to transform and codes the mass and energies. All is a question of transferts , conservations, distributions of this energy and mass in a pure evolutive point of vue. There is like an aim in all this puzzle at my humble opinion, It is the meaning of my theory os spherisation. If my reasoning is correct with this cold dark matter , we can see the evolution also and with this dark energy for this space also, and if the cold dark matter is the second fuel permitting the balance , so we need to complete our thermodynamics and heat because we need to consider a kind of understanding of what is this cold and zero absolute, there is like a fractal near this zero beyond our understanding still. We can lso consider the open and closed system, and if the universe is a sphere closed, and that this center is a sphere of supermatter energy distributing and sending the codes, that becomes very relevant considering this infinite energy beyond and the potential and the future predictions.
Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 16, 2020 @ 12:44 GMT
see also dear all that the gravitational energy is intriguing in its properties, we know the newtonian mechanics and the concept on this road but for the general relativity it is different and that becomes complex due to tensors and if we consider the two other aethers that I explained in my odel, that can help in superimposing them because I beleive strongly that this gravitation is the main general universal chief orchestra and to better undertand it, we must superimpose new parameters , the general relativity does not seem to be the main piece and einstein recognised this, it lacks really several things to understand generally this concept of gravitational energy. This space vacuum coded and this cold dark matter superimposed can help it seems to me.