scholarly journals The mathematical nature of the universe and consciousness: the universe is a collection of self-driven mathematical entities; consciousness is a Turing machine’s subjective mathematical model of the objective universe

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu
Keyword(s):  
Mathematical Model ◽  
World Line ◽  
Situation Model ◽  
Mathematical Structure ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
Objective Reality ◽  
Technical Limitation ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Language Network

Humans are limited in what they know by the technical limitation of their cortical language network. A reality is a situation model. The universe is a collection of self-driven mathematical entities; the universe is an objective mathematical structure which keeps evolving by itself automatically. If we are happy to accept randomness, it’s obviously possible that all other worlds in the many-worlds interpretation don’t exist objectively. Consciousness is actually the use of a mathematical model by a Turing machine (TM). A TM’s consciousness or decisions shouldn’t be able to alter/impact/change the fated world line of any elementary particle within this world. Except Schrodinger equation (or its counterpart) which is the only actual causality of the objective reality, any other causality is only a (subjective) Granger causality.

scholarly journals .The mathematical nature of the universe and consciousness: the universe is a collection of self-driven mathematical entities; consciousness is a Turing machine’s subjective mathematical model of the objective universe

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu
Keyword(s):  
Elementary Particle ◽  
Mathematical Model ◽  
World Line ◽  
Conscious Experience ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
External Observer ◽  
Objective Reality ◽  
Technical Limitation ◽  
Subjective Reality ◽  
The Universe

Humans are limited in what they know by the technical limitation of their cortical language network. A reality is a situation model. The universe is a collection of self-driven mathematical entities. If we are happy to accept randomness, it’s obviously possible that all other so-called “worlds” in the many-worlds interpretation don’t exist objectively. From the viewpoint of an imagined external observer (who is located somewhere outside of all worlds), in all worlds, every self-driven elementary particle is changing its state to match its fated state, together form a single fated self-driven state machine; the so-called “subjective reality” (aka the so-called “subjective conscious experience”) is actually the use of a mathematical model (MM) by a Turing machine (TM). The so-called “subjective reality” shouldn’t be able to alter/impact the fated world line of any elementary particle within this world. Except one objective MM which is a fitted MM of the objective reality, every other causality is not an objective MM but a Granger causality, and is an under-fitted MM of the objective reality.

The mathematical nature of the universe, consciousness, causality, space, time, matter and elementary particle: the universe is a self-driven parallel computing automaton; consciousness is a Turing machine’s subjective mathematical model of the objective universe

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu
Keyword(s):  
Elementary Particle ◽  
Mathematical Model ◽  
Parallel Computing ◽  
World Line ◽  
Situation Model ◽  
Space Time ◽  
Particle Methods ◽  
Technical Limitation ◽  
Game Of Life ◽  
The Universe

Background/introduction This study is to discover the nature of the universe, consciousness, causality, space, time, matter and elementary particle. Methods Comparing the universe to a Game of Life system. Results Found that the universe and a Game of Life system have the similar mathematical nature. Conclusions Humans are limited in what they know by the technical limitation of their cortical language network. A reality is a situation model. The universe is a self-driven objective parallel computing automaton which evolves by itself automatically – Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle can be explained under this situation model. If we are happy to accept randomness, it’s obviously possible that all other worlds in the many-worlds interpretation don’t exist objectively. Consciousness is actually the use of a mathematical model by a Turing machine (TM). A TM’s consciousness or deliberate decisions/choices shouldn’t be able to actually/objectively change/control/drive the fated world line of any elementary particle within this world. Except Schrodinger equation (or its counterpart) which is the only actual causality of the objective-reality, any other causality is only a (subjective) Granger causality.

scholarly journals The universe is a collection of self-driven mathematical entities; subjective consciousness is the use of mathematical models by a Turing machine

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu
Keyword(s):  
Elementary Particle ◽  
Turing Machine ◽  
World Line ◽  
Conscious Experience ◽  
Physical Interaction ◽  
External Observer ◽  
Objective Reality ◽  
Technical Limitation ◽  
Subjective Reality ◽  
The Universe

Humans are limited in what they know by the technical limitation of their cortical language network. A reality is a situation model. The universe is a collection of self-driven mathematical entities. If we are happy to accept randomness, it’s obviously possible that all other so-called “worlds” in the many-worlds interpretation don’t exist objectively. The so-called “physical interaction” (aka objective interaction) among any number of elementary particles is consistent with the so-called “physical law”. From the viewpoint of an imagined external observer (who is located somewhere outside of all worlds), in all worlds, every self-driven elementary particle is changing its state to match its fated state, together form a single fated self-driven state machine; the so-called “subjective reality” (aka the so-called “subjective conscious experience”) is actually the use of a mathematical model (MM) by a Turing machine (TM). The so-called “subjective reality” shouldn’t be able to alter/impact the fated world line of any elementary particle within this world. Except one objective MM which is a fitted MM of the objective reality, every other causality is not an objective MM but a Granger causality, and is an under-fitted MM of the objective reality.

scholarly journals Emergence of Objective Reality in an Irreversible Friend thought Experiment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Shuler
Keyword(s):  
Thought Experiment ◽  
Hidden Variables ◽  
Ensemble Member ◽  
Irreversible Processes ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
Objective Reality ◽  
Objective World ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wigner’S Friend ◽  
The Many

Background: Recently some photon models of a Wigner's friend experiment have led investigators to suggest objective reality does not exist, and to publish non-academic articles with such claims. The public is not equipped to evaluate the severe limitations of these experiments. The separation of Wigner from the experiment and use of only reversible coherent processes for the friend allow operations that are not possible in ordinary reality according to the latest quantum research. Methods: We suggest directly testing the implied claim that objective reality, including incoherent objects with irreversible non-destructive memory, can be held in superposition. We suspect it will fail, but provide for a graduated approach that may discover something about the conditions for superposition collapse. To this end we design a thought experiment to model the objective world, investigating under what conditions experimenters in the same world (ensemble member) will be able to record a result and find it does not appear to change. An observer has a viewing apparatus and a memory apparatus. A second uncorrelated viewer of the same recorded result is employed to obtain objectivity. By hypothesis the uncorrelated second viewer obtains the same view of the measurement record as the first observer. There are not two measurements. This is not an investigation of hidden variables. Results: To model the objective world, incoherent and irreversible processes must be included. To test for superposition, coherence has to be established. These seem to present a contradiction. Conclusions: The thought experiment has suggested new places to look other than size for the origin of objective reality from the quantum world, casts doubt on the Many-Worlds interpretation, and provides a method of testing it.

scholarly journals Why probability ambiguity in the many-worlds interpretation is blessing

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minseong Kim
Keyword(s):  
Black Hole ◽  
Black Hole Thermodynamics ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
Many Worlds Interpretation ◽  
Conventional Literature ◽  
Quantum Phenomena ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Universe

The question of how to make sense of probability in the many-worlds interpretation is a controversial and difficult one. Conventional literature attempts to provide a correct way of assigning probability to each world in the universe of many worlds. Differing from these attempts, it is argued that probability ambiguity in the many-worlds interpretation is not a curse but a blessing, allowing us to study quantum phenomena in terms of conventional thermodynamics, connecting readily to black hole thermodynamics.

Time as an Expanding Labyrinth of Information

KronoScope ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 64-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Halpern
Keyword(s):  
General Relativity ◽  
Classical Mechanics ◽  
Information Space ◽  
Interpretation Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
Cosmological Expansion ◽  
Expansion Of The Universe ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Dense State

AbstractWe propose a model of time in physics that combines the determinism of classical mechanics, the irreversibility of thermodynamics, and the ever-bifurcating strands of the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics, by means of an expanding, labyrinthine information space. We speculate that the growth of this space is linked to the cosmological expansion of the universe from its initial dense state by means of a generalization of general relativity to include the information space.

scholarly journals Emergence of Objective Reality in an Irreversible Friend thought Experiment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Shuler
Keyword(s):  
Thought Experiment ◽  
Hidden Variables ◽  
Ensemble Member ◽  
Irreversible Processes ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
Objective Reality ◽  
Objective World ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wigner’S Friend ◽  
The Many

Background: Recently some photon models of a Wigner's friend experiment have led investigators to suggest objective reality does not exist, and to publish non-academic articles with such claims. The public is not equipped to evaluate the severe limitations of these experiments. The separation of Wigner from the experiment and use of only reversible coherent processes for the friend allow operations that are not possible in ordinary reality according to the latest quantum research. Methods: We suggest directly testing the implied claim that objective reality, including incoherent objects with irreversible non-destructive memory, can be held in superposition. We suspect it will fail, but provide for a graduated approach that may discover something about the conditions for superposition collapse. To this end we design a thought experiment to model the objective world, investigating under what conditions experimenters in the same world (ensemble member) will be able to record a result and find it does not appear to change. An observer has a viewing apparatus and a memory apparatus. A second uncorrelated viewer of the same recorded result is employed to obtain objectivity. By hypothesis the uncorrelated second viewer obtains the same view of the measurement record as the first observer. There are not two measurements. This is not an investigation of hidden variables. Results: To model the objective world, incoherent and irreversible processes must be included. To test for superposition, coherence has to be established. These seem to present a contradiction. Conclusions: The thought experiment has suggested new places to look other than size for the origin of objective reality from the quantum world, casts doubt on the Many-Worlds interpretation, and provides a method of testing it.

scholarly journals The Cosmic Void

Non-Being ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 115-138
Author(s):  
Eddy Keming Chen
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum State ◽  
Special Kind ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
Fundamental Level ◽  
Fundamental Matter ◽  
Standard Picture ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Universe

What exists at the fundamental level of reality? On the standard picture, the fundamental reality contains (among other things) fundamental matter, such as particles, fields, or even the quantum state. Non-fundamental facts are explained by facts about fundamental matter, at least in part. In this paper, I introduce a non-standard picture called the “cosmic void” in which the universe is devoid of any fundamental material ontology. Facts about tables and chairs are recovered from a special kind of laws that satisfy strong determinism. All non-fundamental facts are completely explained by nomic facts. I discuss a concrete example of this picture in a strongly deterministic version of the many-worlds theory of quantum mechanics. I discuss some philosophical and scientific challenges to this view, as well as some connections to ontological nihilism.

History, Causation, and the Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Bruce S. Bennett ◽  
Moletlanyi Tshipa
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Possible Worlds ◽  
Interpretation Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Level ◽  
Many Worlds ◽  
Starting Conditions ◽  
Many Worlds Interpretation ◽  
Historical Causation ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Universe

AbstractThe Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) is a theory in physics which proposes that, rather than quantum-level events being resolved randomly as according to the Copenhagen Interpretation, the universe constantly divides into different versions or worlds. All physically possible worlds occur, though some outcomes are more likely than others, and therefore all possible histories exist. This paper explores some implications of this for history, especially concerning causation. Unlike counterfactuals, which concern different starting conditions, MWI concerns different outcomes of the same starting conditions. It is argued that analysis of causation needs to take into account the divergence of outcomes and the possibility that we inhabit a less probable world. Another implication of MWI is convergent history: for any given world there will be similar worlds which are the result of different pasts which are, however, more or less probable. MWI can assist in thinking about historical causation and indicates the importance of probabilistic causation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document