[Fis] Fw: Is quantum information the basis of spacetime? Some New Theories

Tue Nov 15 10:30:23 CET 2016

Dear FIS,

The noble conquest of choosing the right method of understanding
information divides this learned society. Some argue that pre-Platonic
approaches towards understanding Nature are pre-scientific and therefore
can be dismissed out of hand.

Let us imagine that the Neanderthals have maintained a hidden existence (or
reappear in the form of visiting aliens). They have not followed the Sumer
ideas of abstracting *similar* properties of *different* things, and
thereby arriving at the concept of “one that is like the other”, and then
inventing two and three, etc.; no, the Neanderthal-aliens have organised
their perceptions on the idea of *different* properties of *similar*
things. It is a pre-conception, dictated by our neurology, that we use the
similarity properties of things as the commonly accepted right way to look
at things.

The aliens make patterns and observe the differences among the patterns
that can be made. They have built a completely different basic approach to
mathematical logic. To understand how they calculate much more exactly than
us mainstream Sumer disciples, it is necessary that one be ready to accept
as an ordering principle a detail that one was taught to disregard. This is
no small matter, because the realignment of fundamental principles of
logic, of deeply habituated patterns of cognition, is a long process and
the rewards come in variable portions.

Do tell, do you see a difference between a+b=c and b+a=c? If one says that
it makes no difference, then one negates the advances in management of
trade flows, of logistics as a science. The First In First Out principle
cannot be evaluated over the First In Last Out principle, in pure
mathematics, because the sequence of the summands has no relevance to the
result of the additive operation. We see that applied science calmly
disregards the doctrinal ban on distinguishing on sequence among summands,
so people do use and know how to use the sequential properties of abstract
entities. One may also ask, what kind of mathematics will evolve if the
sequences allow for results of other operations than addition. Order of
summands is not relevant for operation of addition. Order of summands is
relevant for which operation?

In all respect, the present-day way of dealing with a small detail of
a+b=c, the basis of all logic, is not very scientific. Why is it necessary
to define that a+b is the same as b+a? There are some little doubts,
against which explicitly rules this an ex-cathedra declaration, doubts that
could be addressed, if only one had the simple-minded attitudes of a
pre-scientific, instinctive, biological animal. Let us be less
ethno-centric: who says that it is of a moral superiority to heap things
together and weigh them as a sum of alike objects, than the other way of
making, by un-heaping and ordering, sequential, planar and spatial
arrangements based on subtle differences among individual objects? The
former method knows the quantities; the latter knows the places. In case
there are anthropologists among the FIS, please organise a field trip to a
forgotten tribe of natives, who count by comparing the differences among
patterns. The Establishment will be surprised to learn the practicability
of some of the inventions these savages have found in their pre-scientific
fixation on some details of logical operations.

Pre-historic or culturally alien approaches need not be inferior.

Karl

2016-11-14 9:59 GMT+01:00 Joseph Brenner <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch>:

> Dear All,
>
> It is fascinating to watch the evolution of ideas about information as a
> function of some new theories which beg for critique:
>
> 1. Andrei gives a correct explanation of the origin of Irreducible Quantum
> Randomness. In my opinion, however, it is not necessary to assume that
> randomness at the quantum level has the properties of APPARENT randomness
> at the cognitive level, that is, apparent free will. Any cognitive
> equivalent of non-locality is a cognitive projection.
>
> 2. Karl returns to a Platonic world of numbers which are causally
> effective. I think the appropriate term for this approach is pre-scientific.
>
> 3. Alex sees the same form of causal effectiveness in Fisher information,
> as interpreted by Frieden. A critique exists of Frieden's inventions which
> seems correct to me. The new concepts (e.g. "bound information") and gaps
> in Frieden's theory are exactly those which can be filled with the real
> dynamic properties of energy/information. The discussion of these is far
> from exhausted.
>
> As an inhabitant of space-time, I am glad that it does not seem to require
> any of the entities of theories 2. and 3. as its BASIS. If it did, I might
> not exist.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Joseph
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Khrennikov" <
> andrei.khrennikov at lnu.se>
> To: "'FIS Webinar'" <Fis at listas.unizar.es>
> Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 10:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?
>
>
>     Dear all,
> I make the last remark about "physical information". The main problem of
> quantum physics is to justify so called
> IRREDUCIBLE QUANTUM RANDOMNESS (IQR). It was invented  by von Neumann.
> Quantum randomness, in contrast to classical,
> cannot be reduced to variations in an ensemble. One single electron is
> irreducibly random.
>
> The operational Copenhagen interpretation cannot "explain" the origin of
> IQR, since it does not even try to explain anything,
> "Shut up and calculate!" (R. Feynman to his students). Nevertheless, many
> top experts in QM want some kind of "explanation". The informational
> approach to QM is one
> of such attempts. Roughly speaking, one tries to get IQR from fundamental
> notion of "physical information" as the basic blocks of Nature.
>
> This is very important activity, since nowadays IQR has huge technological
> value, the quantum random generators are justified through IQR. And this is
> billion Euro
> project.
>
> Finally, to check experimentally the presence of IQR, we have to appeal to
> violation  of Bell's inequality. And here (!!!) to proceed we  have to
> accept the existence of
> FREE WILL. Thus finally the cognitive elements appears, but in  very
> surprisingly
> setting....
>
> Yours, andrei
>
> Andrei Khrennikov, Professor of Applied Mathematics,
> Int. Center Math Modeling: Physics, Engineering, Economics, and Cognitive
> Sc.
> Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden
> My RECENT BOOKS:
> http://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/p1036
> http://www.springer.com/in/book/9789401798181
> http://www.panstanford.com/books/9789814411738.html
> http://www.cambridge.org/cr/academic/subjects/physics/econop
> hysics-and-financial-physics/quantum-social-science
> http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783642051005
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Fis [fis-bounces at listas.unizar.es] on behalf of John Collier [
> Collierj at ukzn.ac.za]
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 9:19 PM
> To: loet at leydesdorff.net; 'Alex Hankey'; 'FIS Webinar'
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?
>
> More on Quantum information and emergent spacetime, this time by Erik P.
> Verlinde:
> Emergent Gravity and the Dark Universe<https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.02269>
>
> There is a less formal review at
> http://m.phys.org/news/2016-11-theory-gravity-dark.html
>
> I consider the idea very speculative, as I have seen no work on
> information within a spacetime boundary except for this sort of work.
>
> Of course, meaning need not apply. I doubt that it is bounded by language,
> but it at least has to be representational. Perhaps more is also required.
> I am reluctant to talk of meaning when discussing the semiotics of
> biological chemicals, for example, but could not find a better word. A made
> up word like Deacon’s “entention” might work best, but it still would not
> apply to the physics cases, even though the information in the boundaries
> in all cases but the internal information one can tell you about the
> spacetime structure within the boundary. That seems to me that it is like
> smoke to fire: smoke doesn’t mean fire, despite the connection.
>
> John Collier
> Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Associate
> Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal
> http://web.ncf.ca/collier
>
> From: Fis [mailto:fis-bounces at listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Loet
> Leydesdorff
> Sent: Saturday, 12 November 2016 9:29 PM
> To: 'Alex Hankey' <alexhankey at gmail.com>; 'FIS Webinar' <
> Fis at listas.unizar.es>
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?
>
> Dear Alex and colleagues,
>
> Thank you for the reference; but my argument was about “meaning”.
> “Meaning” can only be considered as constructed in language. Other uses of
> the word are metaphorical. For example, the citation to Maturana.
>
> Information, in my opinion, can be defined content-free (a la Shannon,
> etc.) and then be provided with meaning in (scholarly) discourses. I
> consider physics as one among other scholarly discourses. Specific about
> physics is perhaps the universalistic character of the knowledge claims.
> For example: “Frieden's points apply to quantum physics
> as well as classical physics.“ So what? This seems to me a debate within
> physics without much relevance for non-physicists (e.g., economists or
> linguists).
>
> Best,
> Loet
>
> ________________________________
> Loet Leydesdorff
> Professor, University of Amsterdam
> Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)
> loet at leydesdorff.net <mailto:loet at leydesdorff.net> ;
> http://www.leydesdorff.net/
> Associate Faculty, SPRU, <http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/> University of
> Sussex;
> Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ.<http://www.zju.edu.cn/english/>, Hangzhou;
> Visiting Professor, ISTIC, <http://www.istic.ac.cn/Eng/brief_en.html>
> Beijing;
> Visiting Professor, Birkbeck<http://www.bbk.ac.uk/>, University of London;
> http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en
>
> From: Alex Hankey [mailto:alexhankey at gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 8:07 PM
> To: Loet Leydesdorff; FIS Webinar
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?
>
> Dear Loet and Fis Colleagues,
>
> Are you aware of Roy Frieden's
> 'Physics from Fisher Information'.
> His book was published in the 1990s.
> I consider it a very powerful statement.
>
> Ultimately everything we can detect at
> both macroscopic and microscopic levels
> depends on information production from
> a quantum level that forms Fisher Information.
>
> Frieden's points apply to quantum physics
> as well as classical physics.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Alex Hankey
>
>
> On 12 November 2016 at 18:56, Loet Leydesdorff <loet at leydesdorff.net
> <mailto:loet at leydesdorff.net>> wrote:
> Dear Marcus,
>
> When considering things in terms of "functional significance" one must
> confront the need to address "meaning" in terms of both the living and the
> physical . . . and their necessarily entangled nature.
>
> “Meaning” is first a linguistic construct; its construction requires
> interhuman communication. However, its use in terms of the living and/or
> the physical is metaphorical. Instead of a discourse, one can this consider
> (with Maturana) as a “second-order consensual domain” that functions AS a
> semantic domain without being one; Maturana (1978, p. 50):
>
> “In still other words, if an organism is observed in its operation within
> a second-order consensual domain, it appears to the observer as if its
> nervous system interacted with internal representations of the
> circumstances of its interactions, and as if the changes of state of the
> organism were determined by the semantic value of these representations.
> Yet all that takes place in the operation of the nervous system is the
> structure-determined dynamics of changing relations of relative neuronal
> activity proper to a closed neuronal network.”
>
> Failing to "make that connection" simply leaves one with an explanatory
> gap. And then, once connected, a further link to "space-time" is also
> easily located . . .
>
> Yes, indeed: limiting the discussion to the metaphors instead of going to
> the phore (that is, language and codification in language) leaves one with
> an explanatory gap. Quantum physics, for example, is a highly specialized
> language in which “mass” and “information” are provided with meanings
> different from classical physics.
>
> Best,
> Loet
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es<mailto:Fis at listas.unizar.es>
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
>
> --
> Alex Hankey M.A. (Cantab.) PhD (M.I.T.)
> Distinguished Professor of Yoga and Physical Science,
> SVYASA, Eknath Bhavan, 19 Gavipuram Circle
> Bangalore 560019, Karnataka, India
> Mobile (Intn'l): +44 7710 534195
> Mobile (India) +91 900 800 8789
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> 2015 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Life Sciences,
> Mathematics and Phenomenological Philosophy<http://www.scienced
> irect.com/science/journal/00796107/119/3>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20161115/028760ea/attachment.html>