On 20 Oct 2014, at 13:44, Karl Javorszky wrote:
Workshop on the Combinatorics of Genetics, Fundamentals
In order to prepare for a fruitful, satisfying and rewarding
workshop in Vienna, let me offer to potential participants the
following main innovations in the field of formal logic and
arithmetic:
1) Consolidating contradictions:
The idea of contradicting logical statements is traditionally alien
to the system of thoughts that is mathematics. Therefore, no
methodology has evolved of appeasing, soothing, compromise-building
among equally valid logical statements that contradict each other.
In this regard, mathematical logic is far less advanced than
diplomacy, psychology, commercial claims regulation or military
science, in which fields the existence of conflicts is a given. The
workshop centers around the methodology of fulfilling contradicting
logical requirements that co- exist.
I am not entirely convinced. I think that para-consistent logic are
interesting for natural language semantics, but I think that in the
fundamentals, the consistency of inconsistency, guarantied by Gödel's
second incompleteness theorem is enough. It explains also why a
machine cannot know which computations supported it, and this explains
where the information comes from (it comes from our relative
distribution in a tiny part of the arithmetical reality). This reduces
also the mind-body problem to a problem of justifying the origin of
the beliefs in physical laws from elementary arithmetic, and partial
solutions have been obtained (you can consult my consult my URL below
for some references). In particular we can explain why the world looks
boolean above our computationalist substitution level, and why it
looks quantum logical below.
Best regards,
Bruno
2) Concept of Order
We show that the pointed opposition between readings of a set once
as a sequenced one and once as a commutative one is similar to the
discussion, whether a Table of the Rorschach test depicts a still-
life under water or rather fireworks in Paris. The incompatibility
between sequenced and commutative (contemporaneous) is provided by
our sensory apparatus: in fact, a set is readable both as a
sequenced collection and as a collection of commutative symbols. We
abstract from the two sentences “Set A is in a sequential order”
and “Set A is a commutatively ordered one” into the sentence
“Set A is in order”.
The workshop introduces the idea and the technique of sequential
enumeration (aka “sorting”) of elements of a set, calling the
result “order”, and shows that different sorting orders may bring
forth contradicting assignments of places to one and the same
element, resp. contradicting assignments of elements to one and the
same place.
3) The duration of the transient state
We put forward the motion, that it is reasonable to assume that a
set is normally in a state of permanent change – as opposed to the
traditional view, wherein a set, once well defined, stays put and
idle, remaining such as defined. The idea is that there are always
alternatives to whichever order one looks into a set, therefore it
is reasonable to assume that the set is in a state of permanent
adjustment.
We look in great detail into the mechanics of transition between
Order αβ and Order γδ, and show that the number of tics until the
transition is achieved is only in the rarest of cases uniform,
therefore partial transformations and half-baked results are the
ordre du jour.
4) Standard transitions and spatial structures
The rare cases where a translation from Order αβ into Order γδ
happens in lock-step are quite well suited to serve as units of dis-
allocation, being of uniform properties with respect to a numeric
quality which could well be called an extent for “mass”.
These cases allow assembling two 3-dimensional spatial structures
with well-defined axes. The twice 3 axes can even be merged into
one, consolidated space with 3 common axes, the price of the
consolidation being that every 1-dimensional statement has in this
case 4 variants. The findings allow supporting Minkowski’s ideas
and also some contemplation about 3 sub-statements consisting of 1-
of-4 variants, as used by Nature while registering genetic
information in a purely sequenced fashion.
5) Size optimization and asynchronicity questions
The set is the same, whether we read it consecutively or
transversally. The readings differ. We show that the functions of
logical relations’ density per unit resp. unit fragment size per
logical relation are intertwined, making a change between the
representations of order as unit and as logical relation a matter of
accounting artistry. (“If I want more matter, I say that I see 66
commutative units; if I want more information, I say that I see 11
sequences of 6 units.”)
The phlogiston (or divine will) fueling the mechanism appears to be
the synchronicity of steps of order consolidation happening. Using
the concept of a-synchronicity we can understand that we can, for
reasons of epistemology, perceive only that what is asynchronous,
and as a corollary to this, perceive not that what is synchron,
which we have reason to call dark matter or dark energy.
These are the main ideas to be presented at the FIS meeting 2015.
Hopefully, the main event, dealing with Society’s answer to change
in fundamental concepts of information, will find the proceedings
revolutionary enough to merit observation from close quarters.
Karl
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
