- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Georges Quenot <Georges.Quenot.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 23:59:42 +0100

In a previous post in reply to Hal Finnay, I have suggested the use

of a particuliar case of additional conditions to the hypothetical

set of equation that would rule ou universe. This is an attempt

to clarify it while taking it out from the computation perspective

with which it has nothing to do.

Considering the kind of set of equation we figure up to now,

completely specifying our universe from them seems to require

two additional things:

1) The specification of boundary conditions (or any other equivalent

additional constraint.

2) The selection of a set of global parameters.

My suggestion is that for 1), instead of specifying initial

conditions (what might be problematic for a number of reasons),

one could use another form of additional high level constraint

which would be that the solution universe should be "as much as

possible more ordered on one side than on the other". Of course,

this rely on the possibility to give a sound sense to this, which

implies to be able to find a canonical way to tell whether one

solution of the set of equations in more "more ordered on one

side than on the other" than another solution.

This is a way to narrow down the set of solutions that offers

several advantages:

a) It removes the asymmetry in the choice of initial versus

final (or any other combination of) conditions.

b) It is consistent with boundaryless universes as proposed by

Stephen Hawking for instance.

c) It is able to make the flow of time appear as an emergent

property instead of being postulated and built upon.

d) This kind of condition is very well appropriate to select

those in which SASs have chance to emerge.

This condition does not seem alone enough to define a unique

mathematical structure but there might be a little number of

ways according to which the remaining symmetries could be

canonically broken.

It might well be that this additional constraint can also be

used for selecting the appropriate set of global parameter for

the set of equations considered in 2). It does not seem

counter-intuitive that the sets of global parameters that

allows for the maximization of the gradient of order among all

possible solutions considering all possible values for global

parameters be precisely those for which SASs emerges and

therefore those we see in our universe: universes not able to

generate complex enough substructures to be self aware would

probably equally fail to exhibit large gradients of order and

vice versa.

The hypothesis of the maximization the gradient of order seems

even Popper-falsfiable. At least one prediction can be made:

Given the set of equation that describe our universe and the

corresponding set of global parameters, if we can find a canonical

way to compare the relative global gradient of order within the

universes that satisfy this set of equations:

1) It could be possible to determine the subset of universes

that maximize the gradient for each set of global parameters

(comparing all possible universes for a given set of global

parameters), these being called "optimal" for this set of

global parameters.

2) It could be possible to determine the sets of global parameters

that maximize the gradient in an absolute way (comparing

optimal universes for all possible sets of global parameters).

The prediction is that the set of global parameter that we observe

is one of those that maximizes the gradient of order within the

corresponding optimal universes.

A prediction with a weaker version of 2) would be that the set

of global parameter that we observe must be consistent with any

constraint we can obtain from the maximization constraint.

It might be possible to solve problem 2) (finding the optimal

sets of global parameter or some constraints on them) from high

level considerations without being able to solve problem 1)

finding the corresponding optimal universes.

Maybe also the constraint could be used at a third level if it

can remain consistent as a mean to select the appropriate set of

equations.

Finally, the hypothesis of the maximization of the gradient of

order within universes could offer the additional advanatges:

e) It does not involve any arbitrary parameter.

f) It might help not to require that a choice be arbitrarily

made within an infinite set.

Do all of this make sense ? Has it already been considered ?

Georges Quénot.

Received on Sat Jan 10 2004 - 18:02:34 PST

Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 23:59:42 +0100

In a previous post in reply to Hal Finnay, I have suggested the use

of a particuliar case of additional conditions to the hypothetical

set of equation that would rule ou universe. This is an attempt

to clarify it while taking it out from the computation perspective

with which it has nothing to do.

Considering the kind of set of equation we figure up to now,

completely specifying our universe from them seems to require

two additional things:

1) The specification of boundary conditions (or any other equivalent

additional constraint.

2) The selection of a set of global parameters.

My suggestion is that for 1), instead of specifying initial

conditions (what might be problematic for a number of reasons),

one could use another form of additional high level constraint

which would be that the solution universe should be "as much as

possible more ordered on one side than on the other". Of course,

this rely on the possibility to give a sound sense to this, which

implies to be able to find a canonical way to tell whether one

solution of the set of equations in more "more ordered on one

side than on the other" than another solution.

This is a way to narrow down the set of solutions that offers

several advantages:

a) It removes the asymmetry in the choice of initial versus

final (or any other combination of) conditions.

b) It is consistent with boundaryless universes as proposed by

Stephen Hawking for instance.

c) It is able to make the flow of time appear as an emergent

property instead of being postulated and built upon.

d) This kind of condition is very well appropriate to select

those in which SASs have chance to emerge.

This condition does not seem alone enough to define a unique

mathematical structure but there might be a little number of

ways according to which the remaining symmetries could be

canonically broken.

It might well be that this additional constraint can also be

used for selecting the appropriate set of global parameter for

the set of equations considered in 2). It does not seem

counter-intuitive that the sets of global parameters that

allows for the maximization of the gradient of order among all

possible solutions considering all possible values for global

parameters be precisely those for which SASs emerges and

therefore those we see in our universe: universes not able to

generate complex enough substructures to be self aware would

probably equally fail to exhibit large gradients of order and

vice versa.

The hypothesis of the maximization the gradient of order seems

even Popper-falsfiable. At least one prediction can be made:

Given the set of equation that describe our universe and the

corresponding set of global parameters, if we can find a canonical

way to compare the relative global gradient of order within the

universes that satisfy this set of equations:

1) It could be possible to determine the subset of universes

that maximize the gradient for each set of global parameters

(comparing all possible universes for a given set of global

parameters), these being called "optimal" for this set of

global parameters.

2) It could be possible to determine the sets of global parameters

that maximize the gradient in an absolute way (comparing

optimal universes for all possible sets of global parameters).

The prediction is that the set of global parameter that we observe

is one of those that maximizes the gradient of order within the

corresponding optimal universes.

A prediction with a weaker version of 2) would be that the set

of global parameter that we observe must be consistent with any

constraint we can obtain from the maximization constraint.

It might be possible to solve problem 2) (finding the optimal

sets of global parameter or some constraints on them) from high

level considerations without being able to solve problem 1)

finding the corresponding optimal universes.

Maybe also the constraint could be used at a third level if it

can remain consistent as a mean to select the appropriate set of

equations.

Finally, the hypothesis of the maximization of the gradient of

order within universes could offer the additional advanatges:

e) It does not involve any arbitrary parameter.

f) It might help not to require that a choice be arbitrarily

made within an infinite set.

Do all of this make sense ? Has it already been considered ?

Georges Quénot.

Received on Sat Jan 10 2004 - 18:02:34 PST

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:09 PST
*