Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 377 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
The universes expansion accelleration solved.
by Marchimedes
05/14/20 07:25 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
Marchimedes 4
Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#27351 - 07/29/08 08:49 AM Re: Semantics, Etymology, Syntactics, Etc. [Re: Zephir]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Yikes! Those graphics might cause seizures! smile
...and I haven't even read the immediately preceding post yet....
===

Paul,
Thanks for moving the solar stuff over to the Climate Change Forum.
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=27329#Post27329
===

Anon at Work,
"...when I first started reading this thread I thought it was a discussion on Linguistics and philosophy of language."
Yea, I had high hopes; but in the end it has served well as a place to define some of the key terms used in other Topics. Illustrating "authority" with that over-the-top example was ...well, over-the-top; but occasional digressions can be very enriching, ...blah, blah, blah....

As for how "...it is impossible ...to ever be certain of the intended meaning of an utterance,"
I enjoy writing just because it allows for the extra time to craft a more comprehensive and illustrative verbal equation; but the point is still valid and well-taken. Receiving feedback and reiteration are good ways of honing in on a fuller mutual understanding, don't you think?

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/principia-mathematica/
Quote:
Principia Mathematica, the landmark work written by Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell, and published in three volumes, in 1910, 1912 and 1913. Written as a defense of logicism (i.e., the view that mathematics is in some significant sense reducible to logic) the book was instrumental in developing and popularizing modern mathematical logic. It also served as a major impetus for research in the foundations of mathematics throughout the twentieth century. Next to Aristotle's Organon, it remains the most influential book on logic ever written.

Logic, however, may not be singularly best suited for achieving that mutual understanding of meaning.

The mythic and evocative nature of language allows for a quantum realm of possibilities in meaning.
Can this help take us beyond logic to more gracefully "embrace our inevitable ignorance as we live our lives forward?" *

* Stuart Kauffman: Reinventing the Sacred
===

Originally Posted By: zephir
I'd like to discuss just a consciousness and semantical aspects of Aether Wave Theory here.

I think AWT certainly confirms the self-similar, stochastic (and? ...the non-deterministic, creative, & emergent -beyond logical) nature of the universe; and hopefully this can serve as a heuristic analogy for seeing common principles and enhancing mutual understanding of meaning.

Thanks,
~ smile
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
.
#27352 - 07/29/08 09:42 AM Re: Semantics, Etymology, Syntactics, Etc. [Re: Zephir]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
The Aharamov-Bohm effect is well studied example of quantum non-locality. It's connected with the Aether model of vacuum, which is similar to the boiling fluid, composed of nested density fluctuations, similar to recursive foam. The main point here is, these fluctuations are influencing the density of the foam even though their local motion are compensated at the distance, because they're forming so called density (probability) waves.

The Aharamov-Bohm effect is related to so called quantum double slit experiment, during which was observed, the long coil (solenoid) is able to influence the trajectories of particles, even though its magnetic field is confined into small space inside of solenoid, so it's virtually impossible, the tiny localised particle can pass through it directly.



In Aether theory such observation has a deeper meaning, because the motion of many dispersed Aether fluctuation in hidden dimensions is additive and it can behave like single giant fluctuation. We can met with this behavior in many other places of quantum mechanics, for example at the case of "quantum coral" or "quantum mirage" phenomena, during which the image of atom is restored from many reflections, which could compensate mutually. In this connection, an anomalous interaction of DNA fragments at the distance was reported (the DNA is large organized structure of ions) and many related, less or more controversial biophysic phenomena (DNA phantom).

Therefore we can consider, the collective motion of many ions inside of human brain is possible to invoke a tangible macroscopic effects at the larger distance, although the motion of these ions would compensate mutually at short distance.

In addition, we shouldn't underestimate the collective kinetic energy of these ions, because the human brain is able to consume at least of one tenth of energy of human body, being a quite effective "microwave oven". At the case of dolphins it's believed, their brains to body mass ratio plays an active role in body thermoregulation. So, at the case of human brain we're facing to energy of roughly 30 - 150 Watts hidden mostly in collective motion of charged ions, confined by neural cells membranes. By my opinion this energy is sufficient to make a temporal changes in density of neighboring vacuum, analogous to those, which we can observe during A-B experiment and which can induce a number of mechanical and electromechanical effects, like the telekinesis and telepathy, the reports of which we can met with often on the web.

The fact, the electromagnetic interaction of ions at proximity is compensated mutually shouldn't distract us from many subtle phenomena, which are indicating the nested, multidimensional character of vacuum. For example, an anomalous effects in inertial mass deviations ("scalar waves") during current changes in the caduceus bifilar coil have been reported, as well as a one-dimensional line of information regarding the cancellation along the axis of the cylinder. This one dimensional line seems capable of recreating the original current "canceled" by a another coil which is critically aligned upon this line with the first, as is a pair of LASER cavity mirrors aligned to a critical precision.

These observations are strange, just because the caduceus coil was designed to compensate the electromagnetic field of coil at distance, which usually covers these subtle phenomena near electrical conductors of electrical current. We can see a close analogy to behavior of DNA double helix wire here, so we can expect a whole range of underestimated electrochemical and physical phenomena in this area.

Top
#27354 - 07/29/08 10:31 AM Re: Semantics, Etymology, Syntactics, Etc. [Re: samwik]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: samwik
...AWT certainly confirms the self-similar, stochastic (...the non-deterministic, creative, & emergent -beyond logical) nature of the universe..
Yep, in fact the AWT proposes a testable model of this emergence, based on the model of nested density fluctuations of Boltzmann gas. You can simulate it by using of computer and we can deduce the geometry of some important structures (E8 Lie group) and the related phenomena.



This concept is demonstrating clearly, every piece of observable reality is composed of large number of another units (unparticles), which are interacting at distance. So that every attempt to describe these gradients by language of consecutive logic (i.e. by the math) is necessarily incomplete and limited, because the reality is fuzzy, which results in Godel incompleteness theorem and quantum uncertainty.

On the other hand, if we can observe a chaos, we can always deduce some regularity from it, because the pure chaos is invisible for us. By AWT the Universe is completely chaotic by its true nature, but the limited speed of information spreading constrains the number of available states in this chaos (like the number of colors in chaotic gas composed of color molecules), so we can always see some scale invariant patterns inside of this chaos (we can say, our ability to see something is cause by our inability to see everything at the same moment).



From the above perspective, the pure chaos can be never observed by the same way, like we cannot met the absolute order - these two things are always in mutually dynamic equilibrium or duality.

Top
#27355 - 07/29/08 10:54 AM Re: Semantics, Etymology, Syntactics, Etc. [Re: Zephir]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
How the concept of infinitely chaotic universe is related to the God concept? Isn't God to be considered as a highest order unique entity? In fact, both these concepts are dual in AWT

Here's a geometric trick in the way, by which the chaos can be interpreted. For example, if we project the regular motion of rotating rod onto plane, the motion of projected image will not remain so regular for us, because the projection of 3D motion into 2D plane removes some information and causality from that motion and the image of rod will be shorter, from long term average perspective. If we would observe the rod, rotating in, says, 20 dimensions into 3D space, the image of rod would be nearly completely chaotic for us and it would appear as a tiny particle.

As another mechanical analogy of many dimensions (directions of motion) can serve a double pendulum. This thing is composed of two pendulums, whose motion is highly stochastic. We can imagine the triple, quintuple, ... etc pendulum and we will face the complete chaos. We should understand, the double pendulum is closely related to the concept of nested rotators of quantum mechanics, which are undulating in nested Hilbert space and to the motion of particles at phase boundaries inside of nested density fluctuations of Aether, they're conceptually the same things.



This concept is contained in the idea of holographic universe, which considers, our reality is formed by projection of another reality into our 3D spaces. We can see, the projection of surface waves undulating in 3D space on the 2D bottom of pool is pretty similar to the density fluctuations of 3D space.




So, we can interpret the chaotic motion of Aether particles as a projection of infinite reality into our 3D space, i.e something like harmonic wave, which is undulating in the infinite number of dimensions, i.e. like omnipotent, fully harmonic God (or the surface of black hole, which we are living in into black hole interior). From this point of view the AWT is basically the Newtonian mechanics of harmonic motion in infinite number of dimensions, which appears completely chaotic from our limited perspective - from this the name of AWT follows.

But i consider the chaotic approach to reality as somewhat better understandable, then the concept of hidden dimensions, because it remains more close to everyday human experience. The philosophic interpretation of AWT is up to you, I'm interesting only about falsifiable connections of reality.

Top
#27357 - 07/29/08 07:20 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Zephir]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
We can met with many examples of inertial character of information spreading, which exhibits the behavior of quantum waves, when spreading through civilization. This behavior can learn us a lot about physics and sociology as well.

For example, we can met with so called total reflection phenomena. This effect occurs at the phase interface, where the energy wave travels through environment of lower energy density into more dense one.

One could expect, the information will spread along energy gradient the more easily, the stronger such gradient will be. But the reality is quite opposite above certain level. The speed of learning cannot exceed certain critical level. Above this value, the object will start to behave like informational black holes and it will lose the ability to radiate it's energy/information (nearly) completely.



For example, we cannot learn a dog a difficult task, because its neural system is of low information density with respect to our. The dog in human society is behaving like reflecting bubble filled by air, when immersed into liquid with high refraction index. The dog could learn a lotta things from human society, but in fact he will learn nothing, mostly due the excessive entropy gradient, generated by millions years of human brain evolution.

On the other, the space shuttle wrecked in the middle of bush is behaving like informational black hole, when surrounded by savages, because of too high gradient of information. The analysis of plane technology would help these people in many ways, but they cannot cross its informational barrier.

Therefore the people, who are proposing a new ideas cannot retreat from the target reality (advance its time) too much, or they're risking, their information will be refuted and reflected back again. It was a destiny of many farseeing people, who have had forgotten the basic rules of energy/information spreading .

In addition, we can observe the dispersion and reflection phenomena on the phase boundaries and gradient. Every new information is violently opposed by proponents of old system of thinking. We can decrease such condemnation by surface treatment of the phase boundary: by scratching and making holes, for example by publishing it in many separated places and by using of viral marketing techniques. The same approach (surface undulations) can be used to excerpt energy from black holes.

We can met with the superconductivity phenomena inside of systems of very low energy density, i.e. at the case of information spreading through sectarian and totalitarian societies, characterized by very strong paradigms of thinking. The rich society is much more individualistic and secular, so that the information spreading has a diffusive character here, i.e. it's not organized by existing structures, but it spreads by peer-to-peer mechanism and rather slowly due the high information density of society.

The reverse side of every totalitarian society of low energy/information density (i.e. in "boson condensate" state ) is, it's behaving like reflecting bubble form perspective of information spreading, so that most of information bounces from outside due the strong phase interface phenomena (censorship and propaganda, relying on ignorance and superstitiousness of society members). The superstitions about Aether concept are the main barrier in Aether theory spreading.


These analogies mean, every information is material wave by its very nature, whose spreading is driven by gradient of energy density like every inertial wave. The case of energy spreading in equilibrium corresponds the inertial diffusion of particle matter. Information always spread more effectively along existing gradients by the same way, like the waves during spreading through foam, i.e. when using analogies in explanation of new ideas. The very general nature of AWT enables to use both physical, both sociological analogies in its explanation. This is because the AWT doesn't depend on the nature of environment, it depends only to its geometry.

Top
#27358 - 07/29/08 07:41 PM Re: Semantics, Etymology, Syntactics, Etc. [Re: Zephir]
Amaranth Rose II Offline

Superstar

Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 962
Loc: Southeast Nebraska, USA
Zephir,
Your posts here are way out of line. They have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Please remove your posts and place them in Physics or Not Quite Science. I will remove them from this forum in 2 days to give you time to move them. Please stick to the rules and keep to the topic.

Amaranth
_________________________
If you don't care for reality, just wait a while; another will be along shortly. --A Rose


Top
#27361 - 07/29/08 08:09 PM Re: Semantics, Etymology, Syntactics, Etc. [Re: Amaranth Rose II]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: Amaranth Rose II
Your posts here are way out of line. They have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Nope, you just cannot see the connections. Believe it or not, I'm just answering the introductory question:

Language: What does it mean? How is it used? Where did a word come from?

My point is, the constructs, concepts, ideas and theories are hierarchical density fluctuations of electrochemical waves inside of our brains, forming our consciousness. And as such they can be modeled like other physical artifacts by using of established models and formalisms.

You can try to propose another explanation, if you want - but I'm afraid, you will not be able to answer all phenomena, related to evolution of terms and development of semantic structures. And you'll not definitely able to propose a general engine for semantical processing and modeling of etymological evolution by using of computers. Just because you're impatient and you cannot see the practical consequences of concepts and analogies. For me the concepts, constructs and terms are physical artifacts, because they can influence (albeit quite vicariously) the physical reality.



For example, the idea of communism can appear as a quite abstract for many people (how to detect it) - but surprisingly it can be observed even from cosmic space! The above picture illustrates the boundary between some Mid Europa countries with quite similar natural conditions, but with different polity history. The mean parcel area in the upper half of picture is affected by collectivization (the dense foam is richer to energy, then the sparse one).

Now we can ask: are the ideas really abstract, if they can influence the physical reality by such tangible way? Or we are just impatient when considering the impact of ideas to the physical reality, neglecting the time dimension by this way?

Top
#27362 - 07/29/08 08:11 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Zephir]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Originally Posted By: Zephir
We can met with many examples of inertial character of information spreading, which exhibits the behavior of quantum waves, when spreading through civilization. This behavior can learn us a lot about physics and sociology as well.
.
.
These analogies mean, every information is material wave by its very nature, whose spreading is driven by gradient of energy density like every inertial wave. The case of energy spreading in equilibrium corresponds the inertial diffusion of particle matter. Information always spread more effectively along existing gradients by the same way, like the waves during spreading through foam, i.e. when using analogies in explanation of new ideas. The very general nature of AWT enables to use both physical, both sociological analogies in its explanation. This is because the AWT doesn't depend on the nature of environment, it depends only to its geometry (recursive, stochastic, & fractal?).
Is that the geometry to which you refer?

Cool!
The emergent nature of the universe can inform us about the emergent nature of civilization, societies, corporations, governments, and markets.

Despite the overwhelming physics background presented here, to make the point, it seems to be "on-topic" enough.

~K

Top
#27364 - 07/29/08 08:31 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Anonymous]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: Anonymous
..Despite the overwhelming physics background presented here..
The problem of many philosophers, linguists and social science proponents is, they cannot understand, every piece of reality is of physical, material nature. Even the abstract math relies on the concept of countable units (i.e. the concept of physical particles) in the role of natural numbers heavily. For example the Fibonnacci series, Zeta function and prime numbers distribution are just describing the geometry of dense particle packing - this is why the Golden rule and other geometric primitives are so significant in both math, both Nature description.



So we can avoid the physics anywhere. For ancient philosophers the Physica was a collection of all natural sciences and this approach was consistent with the plenum (Aether concept) of Greek philosophy. The AWT just illustrates, this approach was correct, the modern science just drown in formal positivistic approach - so it's able to describe the reality with high precision, but it's not able to realize its fundamental principles, even at the case, such understanding is quite trivial. The AWT could be proposed before one hundred years without problem, so that the problem of contemporary science isn't, the Aether concept is overmuch complex, but the fact, it's too trivial for people with complex thinking.

Anyway, as we can observe, the physics has replaced the theology and philosophy in many aspects gradually and we can expect, this trend will continue even at the case of other social sciences. This is because the destination of every intuitive insight and/or ad-hoced concept (from quantity/quality form of dialectics to light speed invariance of relativity) is to find its simplest and natural explanation due the Occam's razor criterion. Therefore I don't see a future of abstract humanitarian and formal sciences quite brightly - everything will be simulated by molecular and atomar computers less or more latelly.

By AWT here's no sociobiology, psychology, chemistry of biology - everything is the consequence of trivial fundamental principles of inertial physics. The advantage of such approach is, when you'll understand the biology, you can learn a lot about other sciences. And now we are disputing the physical roots of semantics.

Top
#27366 - 07/29/08 09:14 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Zephir]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
So, how we can learn the computer to speak and to think by quite general way, i.e. without any lexical and semantical rules hardwired? By AWT theory the concepts are forming a density gradients in causal space, so we can detect them by the same way, like the density fluctuation inside of gas by mutual distance of words in the text (i.e. by proximity analysis). The detection of meaning of sentence will not based on lexical analysis after then, but on the intuitive approach, which compares the mutual distance of words in the sentence with database in as large context, as possible.

For example, the phrase "blue water" has a meaning for us, because of relative proximity of such words in many sentences, which we have met already - such connection of words has a meaning for us quite intuitively, while the phrase "sharp water" hasn't. Therefore the semantic analysis of sense can be based on proximity analysis, when comparing the mutual distances of words in sentence with large semantic database by using of principle "each of other".

Such comparison will require a fast parallel computer, because the van-Neumann architecture of contemporary computers isn't well adopted for such approach. But the analog neural network based on entangled states of quantum waves (qubits) can be used, because every density fluctuation interacts with all others at the same moment, here. Such computer can learn to detect meaning of sentences just by reading of large amount of meaningful text, i.e. by using of the sentences in context, the meaning of which is considered valid a-priori. Such analysis of text corresponds the learning phase of common neural networks.

Top
#27368 - 07/29/08 09:51 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Anonymous]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: Anonymous
Is that the geometry to which you refer?
Well, can we postulate some geometry without density gradients inside of dense particle field? The problem is, the geometry is abstract concept, while the space-time is physical one - here is uncrossable barrier between these concepts, because no abstract math or geometry can derive the time or inertia concepts. On the vice-versa, as I demonstrated already, the numbers, derivations and geometry are concepts derived from inertial particle physics, instead. Every abstract idea is confined to some material waves in our head. After all, it's highly improbable to expect, these abstract concepts can exists outside of human civilization or to expect, they have evolved before people. Before people no geometry has ever existed, just a scale invariant chaos.



By my opinion, the fact, the Universe appears so regular for us is the consequence of fact, we are formed by highly causal fluctuation of Universe, so we have an tendency to sample obstinatelly just a density gradients from random chaos - this leads to the interesting geometric transform, which gives a foamy shape to the observable portion of Universe. But from quite distant/general perspective, here are no shapes or geometry at all. Does some shape or geometry exist here? Nope, it's just a random cluster of water dropplets.




Top
#27369 - 07/29/08 10:19 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Zephir]
Anonymous
Unregistered


So does the emerging complexity, that leads to life, continue the random nature, or is some order realized within the randomness?

Doesn't that "order" imply an underlying order?

~K

Top
#27370 - 07/29/08 10:33 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Anonymous]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: Anonymous
..the emergent nature of the universe..
The emergence is ad-hoced modish term without deeper meaning, being a sort of creationism. I know the emergent, unparticle or process physics and/or constructal theory, but the simple particle concept of AWT can reconcile & replace all these less or more abstract theories. We aren't required to have so many new postmodern terms for different aspects of ancient Aether concept.

From AWT perspective, the emergence is nothing else, then the phase transition (a special case of spontaneous symmetry breaking), which is common in every particle environment and it follows from the finite speed of energy/information spreading inside of such environment. If the energy speed isn't sufficient for homogeneous energy spreading, the system condenses into new density gradients, thus reducing/collapsing the portion of space, required for energy exchange.

The point is, we can construct a formal theory of phase transformation or we can develop a computer simulation of it - but we cannot model the emergence concept, simply because nobody knows, what the emergence really is and how it works (if we ignore the Aether concept, indeed). Therefore the emergence concept as such is redundant here with respect to Occam's razor criterion. I need to consider it for anything.

Top
#27372 - 07/29/08 10:46 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Anonymous]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: Anonymous
Doesn't that "order" imply an underlying order
The true is, the "chaos" concept considers some minute "order" on the background as well . The noise must remain composed of many particles, which are itself pretty well defined - to remain observable as a chaos.

A true chaos cannot be observed at all, because every action is compensated by another action immediately in each place and moment - so it cannot serve for energy spreading at distance at all. Such true chaos is indistinguishable from physical void or infinite dimensional space. So even the fact, we can see at least something from our Universe violates the concept of perfect chaos heavily in my eyes.

After then we can ask: if the chaos must be violated, how we can violate it as much randomly, as possible? How the general structure of chaotic fluctuation should appear? Is the Boltzmann gas a sufficiently general approximation of random chaos in arbitrary number of dimensions?

The AWT model doesn't explain, why the Universe exists as such, it just explains, how it should appear, when every entity remains composed of many other entities - no matter which these entities are composed from. They can be composed of gravitons, gummibears, cooking recipes or another memes - it doesn't matter, because everything what we are allowed to see are just a density fluctuations (gradients) of this environment, being formed by the same way.

Such cardinality is generalization of Lorentz invariance in certain extent: we cannot observe the (motion/reference frame of) environment just by using of the waves, formed by this environment. By the analogous way, no theory can explain its own postulates: for example, the string theory cannot explain the relativity and quantum mechanics, if it's using them as a introductory postulates. And the Aether theory cannot explain the nature of Aether by its very definition. We should develop some even more general theory of reality, instead. Which I can see as a pretty difficult task.

Top
#27392 - 07/31/08 03:14 AM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Zephir]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado

Originally Posted By: zephir
Does some shape or geometry exist here? Nope, it's just a random cluster of water dropplets.
Does some shape or geometry exist here? Nope, it's just a random cluster of water dropplets.
Hey! Random?
It's a bunny!
smile


If you'd like to see my idea of the physics of reality, see: Energy, Mass & Fractals:
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=22153#Post22153

I'd like to see some of those seizure-inducing graphics of yours, modified to show evolving fractal shapes, within the seething and undulating areas.



Anyway, I've been trying to think of how to respond and stay on the topic.
While I think the AWT concept is great, looking for analogies in dense fluids, etc., I don't research physics enough to go any further with the details, I think.
I've always thought about the utility of the early aether ideas when I'd read about relativity, string, or brane ideas; the new ideas seemed to be just semantic routes around the term, "aether," but not really circumventing the nagging of some "medium."
I'd read the new ideas, but usually just translate them into my understanding of the "aether," that sort of intercalating network of fractals, i.e.:
Originally Posted By: Energy, Mass & Fractals #22167
The density, or topographic gradient shown "emanating" from the Mandelbrot sets, corresponds to the "structure of spacetime." The gradient between two Mandelbrot sets would be "null space." By null space, I just mean normal empty 3-D spacetime, I think.

...but enough about my off-topic musings:

I thought I understood the implication that the fluctuating nature of AWT allowed (predicted) for the quantum non-deterministic, nature of reality; but you said several things that made me wonder if we were talking about the same thing.
You mentioned:
Originally Posted By: zephir
....The emergence is ad-hoced modish term without deeper meaning, being a sort of creationism. I know the emergent, unparticle or process physics and/or constructal theory, but the simple particle concept of AWT can reconcile & replace all these less or more abstract theories.
....By AWT here's no sociobiology, psychology, chemistry of biology - everything is the consequence of trivial fundamental principles of inertial physics.
....Anyway, as we can observe, the physics has replaced the theology and philosophy in many aspects gradually and we can expect, this trend will continue even at the case of other social sciences. This is because the destination of every intuitive insight and/or ad-hoced concept... is to find its simplest and natural explanation.... simulated by molecular and atomar computers less or more....
...a few words I don't get, but I think I follow....

Regardless of where we come down on the spectrum between deterministic Newtonian reality, and non-deterministic, quantum reality; or at what level of reality we draw a line between the two, I'm wondering what you think about
this quote from my Kindle e-book [loc.3526-3534]
by

Stuart Kauffman, Reinventing the Sacred:

"We are beyond reductionism: life, agency, meaning, value, and even consciousness and morality almost certainly arose naturally, and the evolution of the biosphere, economy, and human culture are stunningly creative often in ways that cannot be foretold, indeed in ways that appear to be partially lawless. The latter challenge to current science is radical. It runs starkly counter to almost four hundred years of belief that natural laws will be sufficient to explain what is real anywhere in the universe, a view I have called the Galilean spell. The new view of emergence and ceaseless creativity partially beyond natural law is truly a new scientific worldview in which science itself has limits. And science itself has found those very limits. In this partial lawlessness is not an abyss, but unparalleled freedom, unparalleled creativity. We can only understand the biosphere, economic evolution, and culture retroactively, from a historical perspective. Yet we must live our lives forward, into that which is only partially knowable. Then since reason truly is an insufficient guide, we truly must reunite our humanity. And if so, we truly need to reinvent the sacred for ourselves to guide our lives, based on the ultimate values we come to choose. At least, we must be fully responsible for ourselves, our lives, our actions, our values, our civilization, the global civilization."

I suppose it might be more appropriate to copy this and respond over on the "Reinventing the Sacred" Topic, but maybe next time....
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=26073#Post26073

You mention "emergent... or process physics," and I wonder what you think of these (other than that they're, as you opined, "abstract"), in light of the above Kauffman quote.

For now I wonder, do you see everything as knowably reducible, able to be "simulated by molecular and atomar computers less or more," or do levels emerge that could never be predicted, even based on a deconstruction of the "emerged level?"

Thanks,
~ smile
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#27396 - 07/31/08 06:55 AM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: samwik]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
It's all semantics though isn't it? I mean even those amazing graphics and the cute bunny cloud are subject to differing interpretations and meanings.

So, because I too am a bit of a bunny, could you explain what you are meaning by the dizzy graphics Zephir? In plain English? To blow the clouds away! Thanks.

Top
#27399 - 07/31/08 08:44 AM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: samwik]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: samwik
..you mention "emergent... or process physics," and I wonder what you think of these...in light of the above Kauffman quote..
These concepts are independent to some quotes, they're well studied branches of modern physics with number of publications written by serious scientists, no amateurs. Use Goggle and Wikipedia to search for further details, the detailed discussion of these theories falls outside the scope of this topic.
The Aether Theory isn't separated from science, as somebody may believe - most of concepts of mainstream physics, biology and sociology are having a direct counterparts in AWT and vice-versa. The AWT explains emergence and fractal nature of reality by the model of condensation of droplets from the gas, which can be modeled by using of computers.
Originally Posted By: Ellis
..what you are meaning by the dizzy graphics..
I'm trying to explain, the concepts aren't abstract entities, they're formed by standing waves of electrochemical activity inside of our brains by the similar mechanism, like the density fluctuations inside of condensing supercritical vapor, i.e. by the same way, like every other pieces of reality and as such they can be modeled by standard tools of physics and math.

Top
#27400 - 07/31/08 09:10 AM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: samwik]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: samwik
...do you see everything as knowably reducible, able to be "simulated by molecular and atomar computers less or more," or do levels emerge that could never be predicted...
Can you imagine the formation of density fluctuations by another fluctuations, recursively? While this model appears trivial, it's behavior becomes surprisingly complex even after few levels of such condensation. For its exact simulation we would required to use the same number of particles, which exists inside of observable Universe. This is virtually unfeasible, but we can make some approximations to be able to derive at least something from it.



For example, in physics is often used the model of so called calibration transform groups, the dual E8 Lie group in particular (string heterotic theories, L. Garret's theory and many others). The AWT explains, how such geometry arises during process of recursive particle condensation, extrapolated to infinite density. In semantic these groups can be described too, because they can enable us to model the formation of more complex semantical constructs, composed of concepts: the ideas, thoughts and theories. Such model can be used for explanation of evolution of ideas and for automatic generation of new theories and ideas by using of analogue and digital computers.

Top
#27403 - 07/31/08 08:18 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: Zephir]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By: Zephir
Semantically these groups can be described too, because they can enable us to model the formation of more complex semantical constructs, composed of concepts: the ideas, thoughts and theories.
Such model can be used for explanation of evolution of ideas and for automatic generation of new theories and ideas by using of analogue and digital computers.
cool ...and our own bioquantumcomputers (brains).

Cool concept, btw:
Inertial character of information.
===

Just this realization of the recursively emergent nature of things allows us to predict more easily into the future.

For instance, civilization's timelines may go through a process analogous to the "condensations" and consequent effects on other civilization's timelines (worldlines).

Are you familiar with Michio Kaku's Type I civilization?
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=25569#Post25569

Eventually there will be a new level of 'condensation' based on the building resonances (emergences?) of individual civilizations.

Becoming Type I ...is like a phase change, maybe?

Whatcha think?
~ smile
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#27408 - 07/31/08 10:30 PM Re: Inertial character of information [Re: samwik]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: samwik
...Becoming Type I ...is like a phase change, maybe...
It can appear as a WWW III, because it seems, the human civilization cannot avoid mistakes during its evolution.

Top
Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.