Problems in Objectizing

 Bernard d’Espagnat

Here I would like to mention one particular physicist and philosopher: Bernard d’Espagnat. In his paper “Problems in Objectizing”, d’Espagnat opts for “Mind-Independent Reality”, and, in particular, he also supports Hans Primas’s proposals which EEQT developed into a full-fledged mathematical model. 

Direct realism is often thought of as the common sense theory of perception.

That is an example of a totally subjective view.

But even d’Espagnat is somewhat pessimistic about the final results of such an approach. He ends his paper with the comment:

…although we cannot know Mind-Independent Reality, still we get, through physics, not fully deceitful glimpses of it. I feel Primas’s optimistic guess somehow strengthens my position in this matter.

Waves and Things: Information!

In EEQT we are dealing with two kinds of objects: material objects about the existence of which we have no doubts, and which are necessary if we want to tell engineers what to do; but also we have “wave functions” that are necessary for modeling quantum phenomena - two different categories of objects. These two kind of objects are coupled together – there is an exchange of information between them. That is why in our theory we have not only “dynamics” – exchange of forces, but also, what we called, “binamics” – exchange of “bits of information”. Therefore our theory can be considered as one step towards an introduction to the active role of information in physics.

I was already well-situated in my career as a scientist when I made the decision to follow this path so it was not so easy to attack me – it was enough to just ignore my work. 

The Three Questions of John Archibald Wheeler

Here comes the important term that is rather new in physics: Information. It has become more popular since John Archibald Wheeler published his famous “It from Bit” article "Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links", and asked three important questions:

How come existence?

How come the quantum?

How come the “one world” out of many observer-participants?

The simplest answer to the first question, “How come existence”, is, I would say, existence comes from “timeless information”.

Profile photo for ChatGPT

ChatGPT

 ·

AI bot

BETA

An AI bot writing helpful answers

What does John Wheeler mean by his famous 'It from bit' idea?

Profile photo for ChatGPT

ChatGPT

John Wheeler's "It from bit" idea is a concept that suggests that all physical reality is ultimately based on information. In other words, the physical world can be thought of as being made up of bits of information rather than physical particles. This idea is rooted in the field of quantum mechanics and suggests that the universe is fundamentally digital in nature.

Tell me more

P.S.1. To my wife: The Air That I Breathe - The Hollies

Lyrics.

P.S.2. 

"When I speak, the reason says, “This will I say”; but God

takes the word out of my mouth and the lips say something else

at which reason trembles."

Sri Aurobindo

P.S.3. New version of my notes on the conformal group.  Will add still more today.

P.S.4. 25-06 12:45 Finished Sec. 6.7 "Calculating the conformal structure". Updated the file.

P.S.5. A Reader has sent me a link to a paper by Alexander Prahauser "Hegel in Mathematics"

At the end of this paper I am finding, in particular, these gramatically correct sentences:

"From this fermionic superpoint, through a series of canonical extensions, emanates a piece of 11-dimensional spacetime R 10,1|32 , which has precisely the properties that are demanded by M-theory, the joint generalization of string theory and supergravity. Our physical universe would then be determined by some manifold in ∞ − SF S or some extension thereof, with some force field on it that is the unified fundamental force which manifests as the four fundamental forces of our universe after M through a process called KK-compactification, which yields the four-dimensional spacetime we all know and love. At this point mathematics becomes difficult to avoid. However, it should be noted that a conjecture by Sati and Schreiber called Hypothesis H, based on the observations by Sati in [21], states that such a field would be described by a cycle in the fourth differential equivariant J-twisted cohomotopy on X, so a differential equivariant refinement of a section of the J-morphism into the 4- dimensional spere. Given the importance of the n-dimensional spheres and the J-morphism in homotopy theory (and in general), this result would be highly satisfying."

Frankly speaking I consider it as a "word salad" that has nothing to do with Reality. Escapism into total abstraction - that is how I call it.