Monday, April 20, 2015

Intentions, cognitions, time, and p-adic physics

Intentions involved time in an essential manner and this led to the idea that p-adic-to-real quantum jumps could correspond to a realization of intentions as actions. It however seems that this hypothesis posing strong additional mathematical challenges is not needed if one accepts adelic approach in which real space-time time and its p-adic variants are all present and quantum physics is adelic. I have developed the first formulation of p-adic space-time surface in and the ideas related to the adelic vision (see this, this, and this).

1. What intentions are?

One of the earlier ideas about the flow of subjective time was that it corresponds to a phase transition front representing a transformation of intentions to actions and propagating towards the geometric future quantum jump by quantum jump. The assumption about this front is un-necessary in the recent view inspired by ZEO.

Intentions should relate to active aspects of conscious experience. The question is what the quantum physical correlates of intentions are and what happens in the transformation of intention to action.

  1. The old proposal that p-adic-to-real transition could correspond to the realization of intention as action. One can even consider the possibility that the sequence of state function reductions decomposes to pairs real-to-padic and p-adic-to-real transitons. This picture does not explain why and how intention gradually evolves stronger and stronger, and is finally realized. The identification of p-adic space-time sheets as correlates of cognition is however natural.

  2. The newer proposal, which might be called adelic, is that real and p-adic space-time sheets form a larger sensory-cognitive structure: cognitive and sensory aspects would be simultaneously present. Real and p-adic space-time surfaces would form single coherent whole which could be called adelic space-time. All p-adic manifolds could be present and define kind of chart maps about real preferred extremals so that they would not be independent entities as for the first option. The first objection is that the assignment of fermions separately to the every factor of adelic space-time does not make sense. This objection is circumvented if fermions belong to the intersection of realities and p-adicities.

    This makes sense if string world sheets carrying the induced spinor fields define seats of cognitive representations in the intersection of reality and p-adicities. Cognition would be still associated with the p-adic space-time sheets and sensory experience with real ones. What can sensed and cognized would reside in the intersection.

    Intention would be however something different for the adelic option. The intention to perform quantum jump at the opposite boundary would develop during the sequence of state function reductions at fixed boundary and eventually NMP would force the transformation of intention to action as first state function reduction at opposite boundary. NMP would guarantee that the urge to do something develops so strong that eventually something is done.

    Intention involves two aspects. The plan for achieving something which corresponds to cognition and the will to achieve something which corresponds to emotional state. These aspects could correspond to p-adic and real aspects of intentionality.

2. p-Adic physics as physics of only cognition?

There are two views about p-adic-real correspondence corresponding to two views about p-adic physics. According to the first view p-adic physics defines correlates for both cognition and intentionality whereas second view states that it provides correlates for cognition only.

  1. Option A: The older view is that p-adic -to-real transitions realize intentions as actions and opposite transitions generate cognitive representations. Quantum state would be either real or p-adic. This option raises hard mathematical challenges since scattering amplitudes between different number fields are needed and the needed mathematics might not exist at all.

  2. Option B: Second view is that cognition and sensory aspects of experience are simultaneously present at all levels and means that real space-time surface and their real counterparts form a larger structure in the spirit of what might be called Adelic TGD. p-Adic space-time charts could be present for all primes. It is of course necessary to understand why it is possible to assign definite prime to a given elementary particle.

    This option could be developed by generalizing the existing mathematics of adeles by replacing number in given number field with a space-time surface in the imbedding space corresponding that number field. Therefore this option looks more promising. For this option also the development of intention can be also understood. The condition that the scattering amplitudes are in the intersection of reality and p-adicities is very powerful condition on the scattering amplitudes and would reduce the realization of number theoretical universality and p-adicization to that for string world sheets and partonic 2-surfaces.

    For instance, the difficult problem of defining p-adic analogs of topological invariant would trivialize since these invariants (say genus) have algebraic representation for 2-D geometries. 2-dimensionality of cognitive representation would be perhaps basically due to the close correspondence between algebra and topology in dimension D=2.

Most of the following considerations apply in both cases.

3. Some questions to ponder

The following questions are part of the list of question that one must ponder.

a) Do cognitive representations reside in the intersection of reality and p-adicities?

The idea that cognitive representation reside in the intersection of reality and various p-adicities is one of the key ideas of TGD inspired theory of consciousness.

  1. All quantum states have vanishing total quantum numbers in ZEO, which now forms the basis of quantum TGD (see this). In principle conservation laws do not pose any constraints on possibly occurring real--p-adic transitions (Option A) if they occur between zero energy states.

    On the other hand, there are good hopes about the definition of p-adic variants of conserved quantities by algebraic continuation since the stringy quantal Noether charges make sense in all number fields if string world sheets are in the real--p-adic intersection. This continuation is indeed needed if quantum states have adelic structure (Option B). In accordance with this quantum classical correspondence (QCC) demands that the classical conserved quantities in the Cartan algebra of symmetries are equal to the eigenvalues of the quantal charges.

  2. The starting point is the interpretation of fermions as correlates for Boolean cognition and p-adic space-time sheets space-time correlates for cognitions (see this). Induced spinor fields are localized at string world sheets, which suggests that string world sheets and partonic 2-surfaces define cognitive representations in the intersection of realities and p-adicities. The space-time adele would have a book-like structure with the back of the book defined by string world sheets.

  3. At the level of partonic 2-surfaces common rational points (or more generally common points in algebraic extension of rationals) correspond to the real--p-adic intersection. It is natural to identify the set of these points as the intersection of string world sheets and partonic 2-surfaces at the boundaries of CDs. These points would also correspond to the ends of strings connecting partonic 2-surfaces and the ends of fermion lines at the orbits of partonic 2-surfaces (at these surfaces the signature of the induced 4-metric changes). This would give a direct connection with fermions and Boolean cognition.

    1. For option A the interpretation is simple. The larger the number of points is, the higher the probability for the transitions to occur. This because the transition amplitude must involve the sum of amplitudes determined by data from the common points.

    2. For option B the number of common points measures the goodness of the particular cognitive representation but does not tell anything about the probability of any quantum transition. It however allows to discriminate between different p-adic primes using the precision of the cognitive representation as a criterion. For instance, the non-determinism of Kähler action could resemble p-adic non-determinism for some algebraic extension of p-adic number field for some value of p. Also the entanglement assignable to density matrix which is n-dimensional projector would be negentropic only if the p-adic prime defining the number theoretic entropy is divisor of n. Therefore also entangled quantum state would give a strong suggestion about the value of the optimal p-adic cognitive representation as that associated with the largest power of p appearing in n.

b) Could cognitive resolution fix the measurement resolution?

For p-adic numbers the algebraic extension used (roots of unity fix the resolution in angle degrees of freredom and pinary cutoffs fix the resolution in "radial" variables which are naturally positive. Could the character of quantum state or perhaps quantum transition fix measurement resolution uniquely?

  1. If transitions (state function reductions) can occur only between different number fields (Option A), discretization is un-avoidable and unique if maximal. For real-real transitions the discretization would be motivated only by finite measurement resolution and need be neither necessary nor unique. Discretization is required and unique also if one requires adelic structure for the state space (Option B). Therefore both options A and B are allowed by this criterion.

  2. For both options cognition and intention (if p-adic) would be one half of existence and sensory perception and motor actions would be second half of existence at fundamental level. The first half would correspond to sensory experience and motor action as time reversals of each other. This would be true even at the level of elementary particles, which would explain the amazing success of p-adic mass calculations.

  3. For option A the state function reduction sequence would correspond to a formation of p-adic maps about real maps and real maps about p-adic maps: real → p-adic → real →..... For option B it would correspond the sequence adelic → adelic → adelic →.....

  4. For both options p-adic and real physics would be unified to single coherent whole at the fundamental level but the adelic option would be much simpler. This kind of unification is highly suggestive - consider only the success of p-adic mass calculations - but I have not really seriously considered what it could mean.

c) What selects the preferred p-adic prime?

What determines the p-adic prime or preferred p-adic prime assignable to the system considered? Is it unique? Can it change?

  1. An attractive hypothesis is that the most favorable p-adic prime is a factor of the integer n defining the dimension of the n× n density matrix associated with the flux tubes/fermionic strings connecting partonic 2-surfaces: the presence of fermionic strings already implies at least two partonic 2-surfaces. During the sequence of reductions at same boundary of CD n receives additional factors so that p cannot change. If wormhole contacts behave as magnetic monopoles there must be at least two of them connected by monopole flux tubes. This would give a connection with negentropic entanglement and for heff/h=n to quantum criticality, dark matterm and hierarchy of inclusions of HFFs.

  2. Second possibility is that the classical non-determinism making itself visible via super-symplectic invariance acting as broken conformal gauge invariance has same character as p-adic non-determinism for some value of p-adic prime. This would mean that p-adic space-time surfaces would be especially good representations of real space-time sheets. At the lowest level of hierarchy this would mean large number of common points. At higher levels large number of common parameter values in the algebraic extension of rationals in question.

d) How finite measurement resolution relates to hyper-finite factors?

The connection with hyper-finite factors suggests itself.

  1. Negentropic entanglement can be said to be stabilized by finite cognitive resolution if hyper-finite factors are associated with the hierarchy of Planck constants and cognitive resolutions. For HFFs the projection to single ray of state space in state function reduction is replaced with a projection to an infinite-dimensional sub-space whose von Neumann dimension is not larger than one.

  2. This raises interesting question. Could infinite integers constructible from infinite primes correspond to these infinite dimensions so that prime p would appear as a factor of this kind of infinite integer? One can say that for inclusions of hyperfinite factors the ratio of dimensions for including and included factors is quantum dimension which is algebraic number expressible in terms of quantum phase q=exp(i2π/n). Could n correspond to the integer ratio n=nf/ni for the integers characterizing the sub-algebra of super-symplectic algebra acting as gauge transformations?

4. Generalizing the notion of p-adic space-time surface

The notion of p-adic manifold \citealb/picosahedron is an attempt to formulate p-adic space-time surfaces identified as preferred extremal of p-adic variants of p-adic field equations as cognitive charts of real space-time sheets. Here the essential point is that p-adic variants of field equations make sense: this is due to the fact that induced metric and induced gauge fields make sense (differential geometry exists p-adically unlike global geometry involving notions of lengths, area, etc does not exist: in particular the notion of angle and conformal invariance make sense).

The second key element is finite resolution so that p-adic chart map is not unique. Same applies to the real counterpart of p-adic extremal and having representation as space-time correlate for an intention realized as action.

The discretization of the entire space-time surface proposed in the formulation of p-adic manifold concept (see this) looks too naive an approach. It is plausible that one has an abstraction hierarchy for discretizations at various abstraction levels.

  1. The simplest discretization would occur at space-time level only at partonic 2-surfaces in terms of string ends identified as algebraic points in the extension of p-adics used. For the boundaries of string world sheets at the orbits of partonic 2-surface one would have discretization for the parameters defining the boundary curve. By field equations this curve is actually a segment of light-like geodesic line and characterized by initial light-like 8-velocity, which should be therefore a number in algebraic extension of rationals. The string world sheets should have similar parameterization in terms of algebraic numbers.

    By conformal invariance the finite-dimensional conformal moduli spaces and topological invariants would characterize string world sheets and partonic 2-surfaces. The p-adic variant of Teichmueller parameters was indeed introduced in p-adic mass calculations and corresponds to the dominating contribution to the particle mass (see this and this).

  2. What might be called co-dimension 2 rule for discretization suggests itself. Partonic 2-surface would be replaced with the ends of fermion lines at it or equivalently: with the ends of space-like strings connecting partonic 2-surfaces at it. 3-D partonic orbit would be replaced with the fermion lines at it. 4-D space-time surface would be replaced with 2-D string world sheets. Number theoretically this would mean that one has always commutative tangent space. Physically the condition that em charge is well-defined for the spinor modes would demand co-dimension 2 rule.

  3. This rule would reduce the real-p-adic correspondence at space-time level to construction of real and p-adic space-time surfaces as pairs to that for string world sheets and partonic 2-surfaces determining algebraically the corresponding space-time surfaces as preferred extremals of Kähler action. Strong form of holography indeed leads to the vision that these geometric objects can be extended to 4-D space-time surface representing preferred extremals.

  4. In accordance with the generalization of AdS/CFT correspondence to TGD framework cognitive representations for physics would involve only partonic 2-surfaces and string world sheets. This would tell more about cognition rather than Universe. The 2-D objects in question would be in the intersection of reality and p-adicities and define cognitive representations of 4-D physics. Both classical and quantum physics would be adelic.

  5. Space-time surfaces would not be unique but possess a degeneracy corresponding to a sub-algebra of the super-symplectic algebra isomorphic to it and and acting as conformal gauge symmetries giving rise to n conformal gauge invariance classes. The conformal weights for the sub-algebra would be n-multiples of those for the entire algebra and n would correspond to the effective Planck constant heff/h=n. The hierarchy of quantum criticalities labelled by n would correspond to a hierarchy of cognitive resolutions defining measurement resolutions.

Clearly, very many big ideas behind TGD and TGD inspired theory of consciousness would have this picture as a Boolean intersection.

5. Number theoretic universality for cognitive representations

  1. By number theoretic universality p-adic zero energy states should be formally similar to their real counterparts for option B. For option A the states between which real--p-adic transitions are highly probable would be similar. The states would have as basic building bricks the elements of the Yangian of the super-symplectic algebra associated with these strings which one can hope to be algebraically universal.

  2. Finite measurement resolution demands that all scattering amplitudes representing zero energy states involve discretization. In purely p-adic context this is unavoidable because the notion of integral is highly problematic. Residue integral is p-adically well-defined if one can deal with π.

    p-Adic integral can be defined as the algebraic continuation of real integral made possible by the notion of p-adic manifold and this works at least in the real--p-adic intersection. String world sheets would belong to the intersection if they are cognitive representations as the interpretation of fermions as correlates of Boolean cognition suggests. In this case there are excellent hopes that all real integrals can be continued to various p-adic sectors (which can involve algebraic extensions of p-adic number fields). Quantum TGD would be adelic. There are of course potential problems with transcendentals like powers of π.

  3. Discrete Fourier analysis allows to define integration in angle degrees of freedom represented in terms of algebraic extension involving roots of unity. In purely p-adic context the notion of angle does not make sense but trigonometric functions make sense: the reason is that only the local aspect of geometry generalize characterized by metric generalize. The global aspects such as line length involving integral do not. One can however introduce algebraic extensions of p-adic numbers containing roots of unity and this gives rise to a realistic notion of trigonometric function. One can also define the counterpart of integration as discrete Fourier analysis in discretized angle degrees of freedom.

  4. Maybe the 2-dimensionality of cognition has something to do with the fact that quaternions and octonions do not have p-adic counterpart (the p-adic norm squared of quaternion/octonion can vanish). I have earlier proposed that life and cognitive representations resides in real-p-adic intersection. Stringy description of TGD could be seen as number theoretically universal cognitive representation of 4-D physics. The best that the limitations of cognition allow to obtain. This hypothesis would also guarantee that various conserved quantal charges make sense both in real and p-adic sense as p-adic mass calculations demand.

8 Comments:

At 5:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is joy to see how TGD keeps on evolving and boldly asking genuine questions.

For further evolution, as an informant of a bundle of conscious experiences I can't identify with 2-dimensionality of cognition, and I suggest that that idea might simply arise from an entangled state with primarily visual sentient-cognitive state, (as also "theory" literally and etymologically means, from Greek verb theaomai, to watch, from which theater etc. are derived) ie. from cognitive entanglement and filtering with space-time sheet of sentience with visual 2D-character (binary mapping into lighted (and colored) pointillistic(!? a la certain impressionit painters) points vs. unlighted/dark points.

A conscious body-sense feel of empathy (cf. negentropic entanglement) has very different geometric connotation from visual sensing. I, as an informant of this 'thusly' conscious experience, can best describe this as infinitely(?) dense point at heart chackra, where conscious sensations of "good feel" and "bad feel" locally alternate in various mixtures and intensities, surrounded with field-like extentions, for which the best mathematical analogy so far has been some kind of Dehn-ball. The 'ball' aspect sensing happens in 3-D and/or 4-D, and the ball-like field consists of n-dimensional dimension lines (cf. "worm holes") allowing heart-local "non-local" empathy of good feel / bad feel entanglements also with other sentient beings and conscious informants. According to most functional ethical theory and practice I'm aware or, the 'good feel' is the norm (universe=god=love) and the 'bad feels' are exceptions to the rule arising from breaking of strong entanglements aka "attachments", such as actual loss of a love, or fear and worry of loss projected to some other space time sheet than 'now'. Informant expressions such as "heart-broken" and "without him/her/it", there's an empty space within me", etc. gain very literal spatio-temporal interpretations. On the other hand, according to critical-ethical theory of global-local, the Universal Source of 'good feel' is already and always inside each heart and each and every point in space-time, and can be also consciously sensed-experienced when filters that cover it are removed.

One further comment, I associate intending with 'focus', and as the word in-tention suggests, the movement has more pointed character than that of planar mapping. If needs that give rise to intentions arise adelically, the most self-suggestive geometry of intentional targeting to fulfill the adelically metabolic need would be ideles. Or just 'id-gesture', as the Latin version of Freud goes. Note that when walking, the intention to not stumble and fall, and when stumbling, step dancing faster than conscious thought, is very carefully focused on the point of balance. :)

 
At 6:35 AM, Anonymous Matpitka@luukku.com said...


To Anonymous:

I have been very critical about string models but I must admit that they have caught something very profound about the structure of existence. String world sheets and partonic 2-surface could be seen as maximal cognitive representations that one can have. One can of course have a lot of them.

One extremely nice feature is that conformal invariance implies the reduction of WCW for string world sheets and partonic 2-surfaces to the confromal moduli space for them. They are finite-dimensional and I have already applied these spaces in p-adic mass calculations.

Too many independent arguments lead to these objects so that I can only accept them. Strong form of holography, well-definedness of em charge, octonionic spinor structure making possible 8-D twistorilization, and commutativity of
tangent spaces of objects in the intersection of reality and p-adicities, non-existence of p-adic variants of quaterions and octonions, fermions as correlates of Boolean cognition and the arguments forcing the to string world sheets, and so on….

Book analogy is at work again. String world sheets define the back of the book with space-time surfaces in various p-adic number fields as pages.


It is surprising that the notion of negentropic entanglement allows also to seriously discuss about the quantum correlates of ethics and moral
rules. In standard physics one has only events. NMP makes it possible to talk about deeds.

The question about precise form of NMP leads directly to the key question about which spiritual people have discussed for millennia: why God does allow Evil. I guess that the weak form of NMP allowing genuine free will in good and bad is the only mathematically consistent option.

 
At 7:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One feels and thinks that it would be nicer deed if one's mode of experiencing would be received as empirical phenomenology that an explanatory function such as theory formulation aims to explain, instead of excluding and limiting theoretically allowed possible experience on grounds of theoretical presuppositions.

Neural networks have a filtering function, and yes, they have stringy character. We do not, however, presume or insist that full-body sentience (cf. e.g. magnetic bodies) and consciousness in themselves reduce to neural networks alone, rather, neural networks and their filtering and representing function in relation to conscious experience deserve also explanation and description as part of the larger picture, where view of "inner" and "outer" extensions of rationals is becoming less dualistic, and neural networks can't be said to be absolute requirement for sentience and conscience (cf. plants, mushrooms, headless chickens, etc.).

Theory of "mental representations" has a more natural place at the level of neural networks than at the level of space-time sheets and undivided whole of sentience-consciousness, which has more 'map=landscape" character than that of representation of externalized objects.

 
At 8:15 PM, Anonymous Matpitka@luukku.com said...


To Anonymous:

I see this somewhat differently.

When one thinks seriously about physics and consciousness, one sooner or later starts to talk about ontology, even when one is physicist;-). In my case new ontology emerged gradually: space-time as 4-surface of imbedding space, WCW, subjective existence as quantum jumps between objective existences, zero energy ontology, hierarchy of Planck constants, p-adic physics as physics of cognition (note that I have no dropped "and intention";-)), WCW.

Even worse;-), if one is seriously building what one might call unification, eventually also the word "epistemology" creeps in, and one must seriously ponder what one can know. Uncertainty Principle to the discoveries of physical epistemology.

These two words are practically all that I know about philosophy as an academic discipline. Therefore I do not know the name of branch of philosophy studying what can be not only known but also expressed using language, that is mathematically. Let us temporarily call the field of philosophy X-ology.

In TGD framework the first X-logical discovery is the realisation that although space-time surface is 4-D and seems that all that we can say mathematically about quantum physics is expressible mathematically in terms of string world sheets and partonic 2-surfaces. Strong form of holography is another manner to say this. Or strong form of general coorinate invariance which explains it. Note that this is much more than string models can say - one would have only string world sheets.

One can have space-time surfaces full of string world sheets and get arbitrary precise description of space-time but it is not of course the same space-time anymore.

What one can known and say define what I call cognitive representations. X-ologist wold say that these string world sheets carrying fermions serving as correlates of Boolean cognition. They reside in the intersection of realities and p-adicities where also life and love as negentropic entanglement reside. These cognitive representations would defining all that universe can say about itself using language.

This is very practical statement. In principle one can build quantum physics predictions by using only the data associated with partonic 2-surfaces and string world sheets. Even better, conformal equivalence classes are enough. Infinite-D WCW is effectively reduced to finite-D spaces of moduli. In case of string world sheets just the positions of edges and angles at them! This is gigantic simplification and gives realistic hopes about calculable theory ( that is allowing to express mathematically what is known).

 
At 8:20 PM, Anonymous Matpitka@luukku.com said...


To Anonymous:


Conscious experience can of course contain more than the basically 2-D representations. For instance, one can wonder whether sensory experience really reduces to string world sheets. Maybe only the *sensory representations* defining percepts do so. This means division of percept to objects with names. This is what brain is doing.

 
At 8:31 PM, Anonymous Matpitka@luukku.com said...



One can of course postulate theories in which arbitrary high dimensions appear. One can look whether they provide better model of the world: string models is one such approach but was not a success. String models produce all kinds of nice things - brings in my mind mouse as a tailor- but not the physics we know is there.

Some people argue that they have experiences about higher dimensions, but they are not mathematicians, and can mean with dimensions something totally different than mathematician.

Emulation of higher dimensional structures is of course possible in TGD Universe. For instance, the union of n 2-surfaces would be purely formally a representation of region of 2*n-dimensional space. I wrote years about about the idea that TGD Universe - or any Universe- must be able to emulate higher dimensional manifolds.

I see too many purely mathematical arguments demonstrating that TGD is unique. And best of all, TGD is consistent with standard model and explains its symmetries. That sensory and cognitive representations are 2-D is a testable very powerful prediction of TGD as I understand it. I have no intention to cut anything out from our experience.

 
At 3:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very good, most obviously a written linguistic description of an experience as such is a 2D-representation, as are also pages of mathematical language. So as you said, X-ology of what is/happens and what can be known (e.g. observables) is called representation theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representation_theory). And as theoretical representations nowadays are usually done, writing linear vectors on page forming letters and numbers and words etc., they can be defined as intentional filtering of ontology and epistemology into 2D-language. By definition re-presentation is not identical with experience, but representation theory as self-aware theory is a big step forward.

Now, perhaps we can approach e.g. theory - and practice - of empathy with clearer minds, being more fully aware that we are limited to discussing experiencing empathy by filtering into 2D-representations.

There is a very serious joint research program into empathy, involving Dalai Lama, other Buddhist monks and numerous scientists, and youtube offers plenty of discussions (Mind and Life dialogues, e.g. here with Zeilinger: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALGKIcfXxcM).

Naturally, representations are not only passive distached observations, but they have also their active participatory aspect in the whole of Creation - cf. observation events. One of the key findings of the study group is that empathy can be taught, or if we give negentropic empathy foundational omnipresent ontological status, education - also in form of participating 2D representations - can help to remove emotional and conscious filters that cover and hinder active and conscious empathy, such as us-against-them "tribal" entanglements with divisive border lines (cf. closed borders between integers of normative integer theory vs. open border-zones like rational numbers; btw. I just noticed that Spinozan Number Theory has open borders already at the level of natural numbers, and maybe there's a link to the packing problem of tetrahedrons: http://www.ams.org/notices/201211/rtx121101540p.pdf).

Can we do a good deed in form of mathematical representation theory showing what kinds entropies, entanglements and observables we are talking about when we talk about us-against-them filters?

 
At 3:51 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

PS: Representations can have also a Quantum-Zeno effect, when impatient intention keeps mapping again-and-again the representation over the wished-for process-event (no-cloning theorem?), as well as their better functioning aspects.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home