[Guille]

Originally Posted by TinyTree

The dialectics in the book are between imaginary characters (the Tortoise, Achilles, and some others if I recall)

G.E.B. is well worth reading. The notion of provable axioms outside the framework of an axiomatic theory is crucial to my theory of everything with regards to the probability of formal systems, which I have never had time to write an article about, but hope to.

Yes I know the dialectics goes about the imaginary characters, but what is the moral of the dialectic, the synthesis, the discussion about?

It must be very fundamental to be so relevant to the TOE.

[TinyTree]

The book, and the dialectics, are primarily about the following subjects:

Recursion
Self reference
Symmetry
Points of reference

Some of the ideas, for me, were invaluable in generating a theory of everything. A couple of the ideas which stood out for me:

- The nature of isomophism- that is when one thing directly maps onto another thing, or when it does not directly map onto another thing. For "my theory of everything", it is important to be able to define a mathematical system which maps to reality. And, the chosen mathematical system is a "Markov chain" (although, at the time, I did not know what a Markov chain was actually, but the continuous Markov chain maps isomorphically to my internal concept, which maps onto the universe as a mathematical object)

- Recursion. The universe, as a recursive object, defines itself relative to its previous frame of existence. That is to say, the universe, as a recursive entity, only exists from the context of a previous frame of reference- it does not "come into existence" from some completely alternate reality every moment- it comes into existence from its historic past.


I recognize that "my theory of everything" does not provide equations for combining quantum theory and gravitational theory, and I can not comment on how G.E.B would effect this final unification. I suspect it may not be required, that is the notion of self reference, recursion, etc, probably does not have anything to do with the "grand unification" involving the final solution to the equations of quantum electrodynamics and gravity.

However, even if G.E.B. does not provide a frame of reference for solving the grand unification it is a fun brain burner nonetheless.

G.E.B. also addresses the notions of sentience, and how this is tied in with the fabric of self reference and provability. This certainly ties in with the themes of this web site, and is worthy of consideration for that understanding.

[Guille]

Recursion is very interesting. I find it very ahrd to believe in a universe which has relation to a different moment, and also why we normally think (now I'm getting more into philosophy of language and time) that a sentence in the present about the past is neccesarilly already ture or false, whiles a sentence aboput the future is not neccesarilly true or false already. We might agree though, that a sentence in the present about the future is true or false for how the things are in the moment, but not neccesarilly for how they are in the particular moment of the future. Whether this is true or we have no free will, still we do think that something about the past is already true or fals,e and this is what makes time travel conceptually impossible (there is the mathematical impossibility of having to acheive no mass, and the conceptual impossibility of being at 12:00 and going bakc in time for 5 minutes, being at 12:05 but at 100 years earlier).

[TinyTree]

Originally Posted by <<>>

Recursion is very interesting. I find it very ahrd to believe in a universe which has relation to a different moment,

Yes, this idea is integral to my TOE. The idea is that this particular moment is tied to the previous moment, which is tied to the previous moment, ad infinitum. This moment is tied to the past in that this moment is one which was available to the past. There are many moments unavailable to the immediate past, and as we walk backwards in time more and more moments become available to the present.

It is like a tree- rather, it IS a tree, of possibilities.

Given a specific moment, like the present, we can consider its potential from different pasts- from a split second ago, from an hour ago, from ten hours ago, from the start of the universe, etc.

The further you go back, the larger the possibility tree of all possible moments for the present becomes.

Thus, it is a recursive phenomena/