`` As if - the explanation of Emergence

Why Not? - Scepticism About Virtualism


The improver of natural knowledge absolutely refuses to acknowledge authority, as such. For him, skepticism is the highest of duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin - Thomas Huxley


A crank is always a sceptic, but is there any good reason why a mainstream sceptic should ever join their ranks and become a crank also?.


Virtualism is a crank theory, that is; it stands outside of mainstream opinion, and is unsupported by peer group status, just like any number of other crank theories that also have no claim on anyone's time or consideration, and rightly so. So, this page aims to overcome the obstacle of standing in the barren ground of the outsider, and hint at why even the most conservative sceptic should take some notice.


Mathematical Crankiness


Georg Cantor was considered a crank for many years, until support from David Hilbert gave his mathematics sufficient respectability to become mainstream. I would be called a Cantor-crank because I disagree with Cantor about some very basic assumptions about numbers. He sought to prove certain number truths, but I would say that the assumptions that he made about numbers, many of which seem to be just common sense, not only skewed his proofs, but were fundamentally incorrect in their starting point. So the first battle to be fought with scepticism is about the nature of numbers. This is an argument about numbers having to emerge from nothingness, rather than numbers being a fully complete ideal continuum. In fact the continuum problem is still a problem in mathematics, and physics for that matter, but I digress. The battle for numbers has a conventional definition in number theory that claims numbers to be a complete set, defineable by Set Theory, and crucially defineable by addition. In contrast to this, Virtualism makes the bold claim that numbers are, like everything else, emergent; not only this, but that in contrast to the conventional view, numbers are forced into existence by paradox, in a process of increasing division of the whole to produce both more divisions, hence more numbers, i.e. more integers, and more rational numbers.


The thing is that in mathematics there are more than just integers and rational numbers, we also have to consider every other type of number, and account for these. The numbers to consider include real numbers that are irrational - algebraic numbers, transcendental numbers, and imaginary numbers, and even surreal numbers. The real numbers are the real numbers because they measure real world quantities of continuous things such as length and duration. However, Virtualism makes another bold assertion, that real numbers are not real, at least not until they emerge. Also, that square roots cannot exist until squares emerge. Essentially, Virtualism says that there should be no continuum problem because there is no continuum, rather there is only the difference between points - bad news for field theories as defining philosophically fundamental entities.


Mathematicians' games notwithstanding, the whole question of numbers is one of what axiomatic starting point do you choose to believe. Virtualism says start with nothing at all, whereas the generally accepted axioms of mathematics seem to claim an ideal pre-existence for numeric objects, and even an axiom of infinity, which is patently absurd as infinite is an adjective, not a noun.


Physical Crankiness


The standard view within physics is the Standard Model, and very good it is too. As is General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. I truly have little argument with physics, except when it comes to some of the interpretations of physical theory, such as Block Universe, and Many Worlds. These actually tresspass beyond the borders of science, into the realm of philosophy, and it is there that Virtualism paints a very different picture for what underlies reality. There are a small number of respectable physicists, such as Lee Smolin and Max Tegmark, who overlap somewhat with the virtual view, because they see the fundamentals of existence as being just numbers, which is the claim of Virtualism. However Virtualism goes a step or two further in claiming not just emergence, but the emergence of numbers as well.


What Virtualism offers the conservative sceptic is an explanation of Time, Space, and Gravity, as emergent phenomena in a quantum universe. That is; it goes some way towards bridging the gap that exists between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, by jumping straight to an emergent interpretation, by telling a hopefully coherent story that explains exactly how quantum changes bring about necessary emergence of Time, Space, and Gravity.


Philosophical Crankiness


The philosophical questions that Virtualism answers are the biggest questions in philosophy - why is there anything at all? and how do we know it? i.e. what is the solution to the Hard Problem of consciousness. Because philosophers have been attempting answers to these questions for millennia, any novel idea is bound to appear a little cranky. However, despite my lack of a name in philosophical circles, Virtualism is no corny joke.


.



Leave a Comment

Comments

No comments yet.



Page visited 210 times