Born to do Math 118 – Forms of Order: Leaps and Bounds in the Bushes
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Born To Do Math
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2019/05/01
[Beginning of recorded material]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: With respect to the question from a few moments ago, the questions would be human beings and relatively similar sized organisms that have kind of broad based broad band sharing of information to make a mind and then applying this to the large scale structure of the universe to imply an armature.
For myself, I would have more question marks about what are the pinnings down about making that extension from this implies consciousness for human beings, say, to this implies consciousness to the universe, say.
For myself, I am agreeing on the general claims. I am agreeing on large scale information processing. The universe appears to be doing a lot of information exchange. There are various ways of modelling this. But then, the making the extension to the armature.
I am not saying it is an illogical leap. What I am saying the number of hidden premises or puzzle pieces face down are many.
Rick Rosner: Okay, the main question as to whether there is an armature or a structure that is necessary to support the information that the universe is made of. That boils down to the question, “Does pure information exist without external support?”
It is not something that people have done a lot of thinking about because it is not an immediately apparent thing. It is not a question that arises easily outside or beyond the idea of informational cosmology and other theories of the universe being information.
Even within quantum physics, which treats the universe as information, or little parts of it as information.
Jacobsen: As an aside, it is the most tested theory with empirical evidence in the history of science.
Rosner: Quantum mechanics, that makes sense. It is easy to do quantum experiments or look at stuff already done, and see that it agrees with what quantum mechanics would predict about it. You can take old experiments and old phenomena.
Not everything has to be a new experiment, you can take old things that you know and then say, “How does this agree or not agree with quantum mechanics?” I would say that given the small or modest scale of quantum mechanics.
There is probably a lot of confirming experiments and data, and phenomena, compared to relativity. In that, to do experiments with relativity, you need something moving close to the speed of light. Some stuff does, but most stuff doesn’t.
So, you need to look at cosmic ray evidence like muons, which move 99% of the speed of light, as they are shot out of the Sun rather than out of a cyclotron and aren’t moving very fast. It would make sense that there would be a lot of evidence for quantum mechanics.
Jacobsen: Within that long history of digital physics, it is not the mainstream, but, certainly, it is not fringe.
Rosner: The universe as information?
Jacobsen: The universe as information.
Rosner: But I would say that within the realm of all physics and quantum mechanics, and the universe is information; the question of whether the universe is enough to support itself is not a question that has arisen.
Because, why wouldn’t the universe be enough to support itself? For instance, in quantum mechanics, there is a fuzziness, which arises due to the universe having a finite amount of information to define itself and its constituent parts.
The universe is inherently incomplete and fuzzy. But there is an argument or a deep assumption based on that fuzziness that – wow – the universe cannot be precisely defined, but given the constituents of the universe; the universe defines itself to the extent that it can, which is to a very fine degree.
It down to one part in, maybe, 10^-34th or near that. People like to argue that without a creator. How can the universe exist because you start with nothing? Yet, we have everything. I disagree with the idea that we have nothing. That nothing is the default state of existence.
Jacobsen: That goes against 2,000 years of philosophical history.
Rosner: Yes.
[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 