Born to do Math 89 – Ain’t Not Nothin’ Goin’ On But the Rent
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Born To Do Math
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2018/09/22
[Beginning of recorded material]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is the current status of IC in terms of development?
Rick Rosner: This is a review. IC stands for Informational Cosmology, which is the idea or principle that the universe is made of information. It is an information map of itself; the universe is built from the relationships among its constituent particles.
The relationships among the particles determine the shape and dynamic of space and the flow of time. These relationships are informational. They are pretty much brought down. One thing about information is that it is the most stripped down characteristic that you can have of an object.
For example, there is something called the Leibnitzian Monad. It was Leibnitz’s attempt to have the most stripped down thing, besides nothingness. Nothingness is no help. What is one step up? It is the Monad, which is something with one thing.
It is similar to a piece of information in one of two states. It is binary, which everyone is familiar with now. It is the most stripped down element. It doesn’t have hubcaps or fenders. It is stripped down as either 1 or 0.
There is evidence the universe is stripped down elements. Quantum mechanics is filthy with informational qualities. That quantum mechanics is like a crime scene with all evidence pointing to information as the structuring factor.
The principles of existence tend to be emergent and determinative; they are opportunistic. Whatever works, works, binary works because it is simple. You can probably find things in existence that are non-binary.
But there are a lot of things that, in physics, have a binary quality to them, e.g., an electron is either linked to a proton or it isn’t. That is-isn’t thing is a binary thing. You can argue quantum mechanics isn’t purely binary in the way I just said an electron is either linked to a proton or it isn’t.
That isn’t true quantum mechanically. In that, there are many things that are indeterminate in quantum mechanics. You don’t have enough information to decide something is or isn’t. There is a rough framework of binary, but the states in the framework are not as neatly defined compared to a classical system that does not have the fuzzy states.
Fuzzy is ad hoc, fuzzy, and whatever works then works. Under Informational Cosmology, we highly suspect the Big Bang universe isn’t purely Big Bang, but, rather, has Big Bang looking aspects because these aspects have informational implications; that an efficient map of information in a closed or nearly closed informational structure which is also a conscious structure would have a Big Bang structure because it is an efficient way of embodying all the different forms of information existent among all the different particles.
That implies Big Bang physics or Big Bang cosmology, which is basically a set of solutions for the entire universe based on the equations of General Relativity, allows for expanding universes and contracting universes.
I would argue an expanding universe looks redshifted, where the farther a galaxy is from you, an observer, the faster it looks like it is moving away from you, which is a redshifted universe. A blue shifted universe is a collapsing universe, which is allowed under the equations of General Relativity.
That’s where the farther away a galaxy is from you, then the faster it is moving towards you. It is blue shifted. It is as if there was an explosion, but the explosion lost oomph over time – and all the stuff that was flying away from you is now being pulled back towards you by mutual gravitational attraction with the ultimate result being everything being brought down to a point.
Under IC, you never see a blue shifted universe because it doesn’t make sense informationally. The stuff most relevant to you also most distant from you. You could see an IC universe that looks like it is getting younger but that’s a heating up and a melting away of the universe.
It still has forward causality but that universe, a universe that looks like it is getting younger, has lost the ability to hold as much information as it once did. You still have forward causality, but the amount of information it holds decreased with time and it looks like a younger, hotter universe but without the blue shifting.
It looks like a big bangy universe but a smaller Big Bang expanding universe; although, you can certainly have local regions that collapse gravitationally. You can have a galaxy that runs out of juice, which runs out of fusible material and collapses, not entirely; it has this cinder-like stuff, old burned-out stuff, e.g., brown dwarfs, neutron stars, black-ish holes, and so on.
Under our vague understanding of IC, that universe gets pushed to a hotter, apparently younger, part of our universe. Anyway, all that is general and hand-wavey.
Jacobsen: This framework exists within a Big Bang-like theorization of the universe, of the physics of the universe, but that physics of the universe equates to a physics of mind and that implies an armature. What is the armature? Why is the armature necessary?
Rosner: The easiest argument is from the minds to the brains. We live in our minds. Our minds model our external and internal reality. Our minds tell us where we are within the physical world in which we live.
Also, they tell us what we are thinking about that world and whatever else we’re thinking about. The only way we currently have of communicating what is in our minds to other people is to tell them about, “I am thinking this. I had this dream. I saw you yesterday.”
Or it is to generate imagery. You make a movie based on thoughts that you’ve had or make a painting. We can only use our standard information inputs and outputs to share what is in our minds among each other, among ourselves.
But it is possible to imagine that there would be a mathematical description of a mind. That you could specify in terms of hardware, if you wanted, without having a mathematical system for understanding what the mind contains.
[End of recorded material]
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.
In-Sight Publishing 