|
The Emergence
of the minim “e = q²n” The
shortest expressions often possess the longest histories. The minim e = q²n did not
begin as an attempt to devise a striking formula. It emerged through the
gradual removal of unnecessary assumptions and symbols. Each stage compressed
the preceding one until the argument reached its simplest popular form. The Original Expression: Time The
inquiry began with an earlier conception of the universe (in 1985) as the analogue
display of quantum computation operating as an automaton. From that
thought experiment emerged the expression: t ≈
∫(⋯→n) Here: t
represented time. ⋯ represented a series of
momenta quanta. →n
represented the continuation of that series to a particular length. ∫
represented the integration of the series into a cognisable result. The
expression proposed that time was not an independently existing substance or
dimension. Time appeared as the analogue consequence of quantum seriality. The approximation
sign, ≈, was useful but inadequate. It suggested that the two
sides were approximately equal. That was not the intended meaning. Time did
not approximately equal the quantum series. Time was
the analogue display of that series. The Problem of “Is” The
deeper difficulty concerned the word is. Ordinary
language says: Time is
a dimension. Heat is
a function of friction. A person is
a body. The
universe is matter and energy. Yet the
word is encourages the listener to imagine
stable things possessing independent existence. It silently converts activity
into substance and procedure into object. That
difficulty had already been recognised in the earlier book. Throughout
approximately two hundred pages, the word is
was avoided. In its place appeared the more cautious expression: ‘as if’ The
universe behaves as if objects exist. Identity
persists as if there were an enduring self. Time
proceeds as if it flowed. The phrase
did not deny the usefulness or reality of appearances. It refused to confuse
appearance with underlying procedure. What was
required, therefore, was a symbol that performed the work of as if
without carrying the misleading implications of =. The Introduction of ◀ The
symbol chosen was: ◀ It means: is the
analogue display of The
original expression could therefore be rewritten as: t ◀ ∫(⋯→n) This did
not mean: Time
equals the integrated quantum series. Nor did
it mean: The integrated
quantum series causes a separate emergent/thing called time. It meant: Time is
the analogue display of an integrated quantum series. The
symbol ◀ marks
the relationship between two descriptions of one reality. On the
left stands the analogue appearance. On the
right stands its quantised procedural notation. From Time to Every Emergent Time is
only one cognisable reality/emergent. A person
is another. A tree is
another. A stone,
a memory, a planet, an organism and a civilisation are all emergents. The
symbol t could therefore be replaced by the more general symbol e,
meaning emergent. The
expression became: e ◀ ∫(⋯→n) This was
a decisive generalisation. The
formula no longer concerned time alone. It concerned every cognisable
reality. Its
meaning became: Every emergent is the
analogue display of an integrated quantum series. The left
side, e, represents the analogue world: reality as it appears and
becomes cognisable. The right
side represents the same reality in quantised procedural notation. The symbol
◀
expresses the relationship between them. Replacing the Dots with Quanta The dots
inside the brackets represented a sequence of quanta. To make that explicit,
each dot was replaced by q. The
expression became: e ◀ ∫(q
q q q ⋯ q → n) The
repeated q symbols showed that the emergent did not arise from a
solitary quantum. It arose from a series. The
relationship between the quanta was therefore essential. A single isolated
element could not account for an emergent displaying continuity, identity, extension,
ealness or history. The
emergent required serial interaction (@c) The Significance of q² At this
point an earlier minim became decisive: “1q² is.” The
square (in q²) does not merely indicate the repetition of a quantum.
It represents the minimum interaction, indeed collision or contact (in a relativity vacuum) required
for cognisable realness. A
solitary q remains procedurally incomplete, i.e. therefore un-real. Realness
appears at interaction. The
minimum real event is therefore represented by: q² The
series of repeated quanta could now be understood as a series of primitive
quantum interactions. The
expression became: e ◀ ∫(q²n) Here: q²
represents the primitive quantum interaction. n
represents the number or length of the series. ∫
represents its procedural integration. e represents the resulting
analogue emergent. The
brackets were no longer essential. Removing them produced: e ◀ ∫q²n This is
the fuller ontological expression. It
states: An emergent is the analogue
display of an integrated series of primitive quantum interactions. The Relationship Between the Two Sides The
importance of the formula lies in the distinction between its two domains. On the
left: e This
represents the analogue world. It
includes everything cognisable: a flame, a tree, an
animal, a human
being, a memory, a
society, a planet, or the
experienced passage of time. On the
right: q²n This
represents the quantised notation of that same emergent. The right
side does not describe what the emergent looks or feels like. It represents
the procedural series underlying its analogue appearance. Between
them: ◀ This
represents neither ordinary equality nor simple causation. It
represents analogue display. The
complete form is therefore better understood as a translation than as an
equation: e ◀ ∫q²n The
formula translates from quantised procedure into analogue appearance. Example: Time The
earlier expression was: t ◀ ∫(⋯→n) After
identifying each primitive real interaction as q², it may be
understood as: t ◀ ∫q²n Time is
therefore not a container through which quantum events travel. Time is
the analogue display of the serial length of those events. Without
the series, there is no experienced duration. The
series does not occur in time. Its
procedural length appears as time. Example: Heat Consider
friction producing heat. Ordinary
language says: Heat is
a function of friction. The word is obscures the procedure. Heat and friction are
not identical objects. In the
procedural description, friction consists of interactions. Their accumulated
effect appears in the analogue domain as heat. Schematically: heat ◀ ∫q²n The heat
is the cognisable analogue display. The
integrated interaction series is its quantised procedural notation. Example: Personal Identity A person
appears to remain the same person from one day to the next. Yet the
body changes. Sensations
change. Thoughts
change. Memories are
reconstructed. No
permanent substance need be introduced to explain identity. The
current person may be represented as: person ◀ ∫q²n The
individual is the present analogue display of an accumulated procedural
series. This
gives precise force to the minim: “I’m a screen shot.” The
individual is not a fixed object passing unchanged through time. The
individual is the currently displayed state of an ongoing procedure. Example: A Tree A tree
appears to be one enduring object. Yet it is
a continuous exchange of sunlight, water, minerals, gases, cellular activity
and environmental contact. Its
apparent unity belongs to the analogue display. Its
procedural history lies in the interacting series. Thus: tree ◀ ∫q²n The tree
is real. But its
reality is emergent rather than independently substantial. From the Formal Expression to the Minim The
fuller expression is: e ◀ ∫q²n It
preserves the distinction between analogue emergence and quantised procedure. Yet a minim
must be visually immediate and memorable. For
popular presentation, the expression was therefore compressed into: e = q²n This is
not intended as a conventional mathematical equation. The equality sign
serves as public shorthand. The more
exact relationship remains: e ◀ ∫q²n The two
forms therefore have different functions. The
formal version is: e ◀ ∫q²n The
memorable public minim is: “e =
q²n.” The first
explains the ontology. The
second preserves its visual impact. The Final Meaning The minim “e =
q²n.” states,
in its most compressed form: Every
cognisable emergent is the analogue display of a serially integrated quantum
interaction. Its
symbols may be read as follows: e —
emergent; the analogue, cognisable world. q² — the
minimum real quantum interaction. n — the
series length required for procedural development. The
fuller symbol ◀ explains
the relationship concealed by the popular equality sign: e ◀ ∫q²n The left
side is the analogue display. The right
side is its quantised notation. The symbol
between them means: is the
analogue display of The minim
emerged, therefore, not by adding complexity but by removing it. It began
with: t ≈
∫(⋯→n) It
became: t ◀ ∫(⋯→n) It was
generalised to: e ◀ ∫(⋯→n) The
unnamed dots became explicit quanta: e ◀ ∫(q
q q q ⋯ q → n) The
minimum real interaction was identified: e ◀ ∫q²n Finally,
for maximum visual economy, it became: “e =
q²n.” The
result is not a mathematical proof. It is an ontological
minim: the longest possible argument compressed into the shortest possible
symbolic statement. What’s time? t◀∫(⋯→n) |