Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

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

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Irvon E. Clear: on 11/10/09 at 15:58pm UTC, wrote NN, for me the Creator of what exists is also the Creator of everything...

NN: on 11/7/09 at 7:56am UTC, wrote Dear Irvon, i agree with your brief 2 sentence response. God, let us agree...

Irvon Clear: on 10/13/09 at 15:22pm UTC, wrote Yes the emphasis is on self-sensing. We all exist between the boundaries of...

Narendra nath: on 10/12/09 at 5:00am UTC, wrote Seeing the coments above, i note an emphasis on self -sensing. We all are...

Irvon Clear: on 9/28/09 at 19:16pm UTC, wrote To Objectivethinker: How can a "lord of the earth" still be a tasty piece...

Helmut Hansen: on 9/28/09 at 9:40am UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Eugene, I totally agree with you, that there is a perfect entity...

Objectivethinker: on 9/26/09 at 18:01pm UTC, wrote "Humanity came to its gods by accepting the reality of the symbol, that...

Irvon Clear: on 8/16/09 at 20:33pm UTC, wrote Your suggestion is certainly a possibility but at this moment in time I can...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Robert, thank you. I now understand the difference between decisions and..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: "Making a decision, means selecting between discrete, a priori established..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Eckard,you seems persuaded by your Words and thoughts.I don t understand..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "In Darwinism/Weismannism there is no first cause, just a causal chain...." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "lol no indeed it is not a lot,like I said I liked your general ideas.I have..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Steve Agnew: "There are three assumptions...is that a lot? The aether particle mass, the..." in The Demon in the Machine...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 15, 2019

CATEGORY: What's Ultimately Possible in Physics? Essay Contest (2009) [back]
TOPIC: An Intuitive Explanation for the Existence of Everything by Irvon Eugene Clear [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Irvon Eugene Clear wrote on Jul. 17, 2009 @ 08:16 GMT
Essay Abstract

Assuming that Physics is foundationally based on common and collective observations of our sensory environment; this is what's ultimately possible: An Intuitive Explanation for the Existence of Everything.

Author Bio

Born in Richmond, Virginia, July 27, 1946. Spent no more than six months there. Work experience includes: cotton mill, fast food restaurants, automobile dealerships, hospitals, public storage, bankruptcy, car salesman, electronics instructor in nuclear weapons plant, state government, federal government. Self published one novel: The Game: Part 1. Completed seven plays and a hundred pages of poetry. Still defining existence as: "if there you can not ask a question then there you do not exist."

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Doug Huffman wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 11:35 GMT
Poet Clear, How can your assertion be falsified? If it cannot be falsified then can it be 'scientific' (after Sir Karl Popper), and, if not, physics? Thank you.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Florin Moldoveanu wrote on Aug. 13, 2009 @ 21:40 GMT
Dear Irvon,

You state: “In the beginning, before the creation of the universe, there was God. […]

Then a change occurred within God. A decision was made to create all possible

objects that are not a part of God.”

I have a question:

If God existed before the creation of the universe, then it must have existed forever an infinite amount of time before that....

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Irvon Eugene Clear wrote on Aug. 16, 2009 @ 20:27 GMT
Falsified if you find an object, force or relationship within this universe that is not changing. Falsified if you can find an object, force or relationship within this universe that is a part of God. How ironic is it that if you find God within this universe you loose Godly purpose in its creation?

Falsified if you can measure all of the potential and possibility within this universe with a magnitude that does not correlate to the magnitude of space within this universe. If potential and possibility exists then where is its physical measurement?

Yes, I would consider my assertion to be a foundational statement in physics because both its statement and falsification is based on common and collective observations of our sensory environment.

My assertion is derived from an assumed imperfect foundation (elemental unit of existence) that is unique, chaotic and randomly dispersed. This results in an imperfect universe that then supports the assertion that it was created by a perfect being (God) to evolve all possible objects, forces and relationships that are not a part of God (imperfect).

If the elemental unit of existence is uniform, orderly and evenly dispersed then it supports a perfect universe and my assertion is not supported by observing, measuring and manipulating our elemental unit of existence. What is the current consensus description of our most elemental unit of existence? Is it orderly and uniform or unique and chaotic?

Bookmark and Share



Author Irvon Eugene Clear wrote on Aug. 16, 2009 @ 20:33 GMT
Your suggestion is certainly a possibility but at this moment in time I can not sense other universes. My survival environment is within one sensed universe and from its sensed characteristics I am suggesting that a perfect entity (thus possessing the necessary attributes to be capable of creating a universe) decided to create a unique universe that could "evolve" all possible objects, forces and relationships that are not perfect. Existing within it we are observing the results...not necessarily understanding the decision's purpose but the decision's results. If you find a perfect system within this observed universe my assertion collapses. I encourage everyone to keep looking.

Bookmark and Share



Objectivethinker wrote on Sep. 26, 2009 @ 18:01 GMT
"Humanity came to its gods by accepting the reality of the symbol,

that is, it came to the 'reality of thought', which has made man lord

of the earth." --C.G. Jung, "Psychological Types"

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Helmut Hansen wrote on Sep. 28, 2009 @ 09:40 GMT
Dear Mr. Eugene,

I totally agree with you, that there is a perfect entity which is the ultimate foundation of all physical objects and forces that are themselves not perfect.

I would even go a step further: Only objects that are not perfect, can change. A perfect entity can never change. Only by being perfect an entity can be the ultimate unchangeable foundation of all that is existing.

But I do not agree that this entity is something like a supreme being with a free will who pursues a particular purpose. In order to be perfect this entity has to be perfect all the time without any exception. There is no longer any possibility to act freely. A God who is really perfect looses immediately his ability to be part of the imperfect universe. In other words.. The attribute of perfection leads directly to the attribute of TRANSCENDENCE.

In my essay Taming of the One I have attempted to describe this entity in purely physical terms.

Kind regards

H. Hansen

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Irvon Clear wrote on Sep. 28, 2009 @ 19:16 GMT
To Objectivethinker:

How can a "lord of the earth" still be a tasty piece of meat for still existent four-legged beasts?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Narendra nath wrote on Oct. 12, 2009 @ 05:00 GMT
Seeing the coments above, i note an emphasis on self -sensing. We all are individual sensors and perhaps independent ones too. if we mostly agree on something sensed commeonly, that is the truth for us. If we all can not agree it still remains agood relative truth. that is what to me Physics is doing. here things/matters get settled as soon as the logic and prsentation is agreed upon by a large community of us, specially giving weightage to the opinions of our more respected personalities. That is the way the human societies run. Thus i for one feel that before rejecting something one should introspect deeply and if such a meditative mind does no accept a preposition, it should not be accepted. The other proff lies when a reliable experimental measurement rules out any prediction of a theory proposed to explain a phenomenon. A single theory for all processes is of course the most welcome one but also the most difficulot to propound. thus all sorts of attempts need to be made provided these meet the criteria of good logic, pure intuition and in-depth consideration cum evaluation. it is not necessary that all should agree but most of us should come around eventually to accept it. There have been changes in what was and what is being accepted today. The same holds for future too, no problem here. Both change and stability has been the features of the universe except for the very earlu universe. It is for this reason that i personally ffel the present day Physics may not hold validity for that period of our universe. My own essay on the site lays emphasis on it.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Irvon Clear wrote on Oct. 13, 2009 @ 15:22 GMT
Yes the emphasis is on self-sensing. We all exist between the boundaries of birth and death. Any explanation of the environment that contains us within these boundaries is first modeled by our senses.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


NN wrote on Nov. 7, 2009 @ 07:56 GMT
Dear Irvon,

i agree with your brief 2 sentence response. God, let us agree is not like human beings. IT is difficult to predict about the Creator of the Universe. We have come on the scene as human beings only in the past thousands of ysars only. Before us came vegetation/trees and animals. Thus , we may associate life forms to have evolved with greater intelligence and comprehension level. Initially it was governed entirely by the environment prevailing at those times. Only human beings are the one that are capable of acting against the environment. Thus we are the danger species for the survival of the universe, starting with our Earth!!

Thus who can be considered superior? i personally believe that our Creator has created human beings in His own image, to see what we do to His Universe. If we maintain and live in harmony with Nature, the same will be sustained. If we act against it, we shall contibute to destruction. The choice lies with us, intelligent beings. We can be distardly foolish to ruin ourselves or we can be spiritually evolved to care about the entire anture, including all living and non-living objects in this universe. it is our intelligent choice!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Irvon E. Clear wrote on Nov. 10, 2009 @ 15:58 GMT
NN, for me the Creator of what exists is also the Creator of everything that could possibly exist. The Creator of all possibility must be an all knowing, all powerful and ever present entity. These characteristics are not descriptions of the human form. It seems that refering to a decision creates the impression that I am talking to another human being. Decisions are made by all living organizms and I would plead ignorance concerning the conscious state of all possible inanimate and animate states of being. What matters most for me is that I exist in the human form and I have the ability to make decisions and apply effort to become the best possible human being that I can be...any value system that attaches rewards for levels of success or failure in my personal effort are accepted as goodwill and best wishes. We should all be aware of the differences that are inherent in over 6 billion variations of the human form and respect the possibility that there is the potential of at least one of the variations being capable of "sensing the creator" within the boundaries of birth and death. As I have stated previously, I encourage everyone to keep looking. We have all shared the experience of birth...we will certainly share the experience of death. What's inbetween is the possibility of creating our own identity...for a brief moment in time...our opportunity to do our best.

Best wishes,

Irvon

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.