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

Nathan Stephen: on 3/21/19 at 11:16am UTC, wrote I am college student. I am studying mass communication course. Recently i...

Anonymous: on 3/17/11 at 22:37pm UTC, wrote Thanks, Peter, for your most kind remarks on my essay. Many persons are...

Peter Jackson: on 3/11/11 at 21:19pm UTC, wrote Jeremy Great essay, where is everyone round here? I've found logic far...

Jeremy Horne: on 2/12/11 at 20:29pm UTC, wrote In the last few days I have been researching further Leibniz's work on the...

Jeremy Horne: on 2/8/11 at 10:13am UTC, wrote Essay Abstract Reality is presented to us both in a digital and...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "I must explain what is the real meaning of Spherisation in my theory.It is..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

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: Is Reality Digital or Analog? Essay Contest (2010-2011) [back]
TOPIC: Is Reality Digital or Analog? by Jeremy Horne [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Jeremy Horne wrote on Feb. 8, 2011 @ 10:13 GMT
Essay Abstract

Reality is presented to us both in a digital and analog manner, the first as evidenced by the findings about the nature of space and sub-atomic entities, and the latter by the uncertainties at the quantum level. It is not sufficient to regard reality, our universe, simply as both but dialectically, one in terms of the other. The most fundamental law of understanding is that we apprehend something in terms of what it is not. We need contradiction to discern anything. Our understanding is process based and has deep historical roots extending back more than 4500 years. In modern times, scientists have relied upon Cartesian reductionism to discern the nature of our world, but deduction also is inherently dialectic, relying upon induction for its integrity. Logic, itself, is the language of innate order in the universe, but its digital aspect is bi-valency that describes what digital physicists have found to be the case in our reality. Evidence is in the form of how the syntax of the binary system and relationships within it reflect what happens here. Such has major implications for us in the form of inherent computations, phenomena as illusions, and complexity arising from simplicity.

Author Bio

Graduating from University of Florida in 1998 with a degree in philosophy, concentrating in logic, Horne has presented throughout the world the view that logic is the language of innate order in the universe. Currently, he is president-elect of the Southwest Area Regional Meeting (SWARM) of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Jeremy Horne wrote on Feb. 12, 2011 @ 20:29 GMT
In the last few days I have been researching further Leibniz's work on the binary system and his cosmology. Not discussing him in my essay was an omission, but not critical to the thrust of my argument. In particular, it is interesting to note his " Explication de l'Arithmétique Binaire", as well as his correspondence with R.P. Bouvet in China regarding the 4000-year old king Fuxi and his writings as precursors of the I Ching, book of changes.

It is fitting to quote George Ross on Leibniz and his cosmology:

"The fourth version (account of creation)is more Pythagorean than Platonic. It is first found in the De organo sive arte magna cogitandi of about 1679 (C 429–432); but it seems to have dropped out of sight until a whole series of writings on binary arithmetic, beginning with the Mira numerorum omnium expressio per 1 et 0 of 1696 (Zacher 1973: 225–228). Here Leibniz equates God or being with the unit of binary arithmetic, and nothingness or pure matter with zero. The created universe consists in a set of binary numbers, which include zeros as well as units, i.e. which fall short of divine perfection through the admixture of not-being with pure being.[LEIBNIZ AND THE ORIGIN OF THINGS - http://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/GMR/articles/adam.html]"

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Mar. 11, 2011 @ 21:19 GMT
Jeremy

Great essay, where is everyone round here?

I've found logic far more effective than maths, and effective at finding the limitations of maths. I agree with most of what you say, and well written too. Worth a top mark.

I think and hope you'll enjoy reading mine;http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/803

It actually derives a logical solution to unification via dynamic conceptualisation, consistent with Edwins top essay, Regazas maths, and others hopefully all also worth your reading and points. Please do give me your views on mine if you get to read it in time.

Many thanks

Best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Mar. 17, 2011 @ 22:37 GMT
Thanks, Peter, for your most kind remarks on my essay.

Many persons are not comfortable with philosophy, preferring mechanics. Philosophers often are regarded merely as speculators, and perhaps this is a factor in the low ratings.

There was an error in omitting Leibniz, but this did not affect the central theme. For a number of decades I have been on a quest to find how reality does express itself, and it was serendipitous how I stumbled across FQXI. The essay represents an intense effort on my part but is only the tip of the iceberg of what I have been working on for all these years, some of which can be found at home.earthlink.net/~jhorne18. The IIIS (www.iiis.org) has accepted my latest on a 3-D hypercube which is a fundamental building block of binary space. The push is on, as I consider in the entomological sense - Latin: ligare - to cohere, or bind - logic as my religion.

When I wind down from my latest submission I will read your work which appears very intriguing.

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.