[Course Syllabus · Physics as Information Processing ~ Chris Fields ~ AII 2023](https://coda.io/@active-inference-institute/fields-physics-2023/course-syllabus-2) Can this scalefree metamodel be used as a fundamental ontology to encapsulate all scientific fields, where every thing is some kind of special case on some scale on some level of abstraction with some kind of implementation? Are organisms nested holographic quantum reference frames, attractor in nonequilibrium thermodynamics constructing goals that form higher order goals across scales? There are so many concrete or more general equations and models used in different natural fields and subfields in different scales with different advantages and disadvantages, predictive and explanatory power and paradoxes in different contexts. Can we put them all in this metaframework to find potential for compatibility and incompatibility analysis, create merging and synthesis on a higher order of complexity, and gather the sum of total human scientific knowledge on one place in this structured manner? Theory of every thing, At start, there is just an empty canvas full of infinite potential On this empty canvas, you can put any set of fundamental philosophical assumptions Those philosophical assumptions are initial structures that constrain what structures are classified as true and false As I'm writing this, this is already initializing many philosophical assumptions, like total openmindedness fundamentalism, truth relativism and propositional information structure ontology and so on, but we have to start somewhere To create futher constrain on the space of possible structures, I'm gonna assume that each structure in this metamodel can live (as has many implementations realtime) as a structure inside potential system inside physicalism with quantum information processing ontology Using (quantum) free energy principle as abstraction that works tautologically for making sense of any structure, a minimal unifying model across fields, scales, contexts and so on Any philosophical, ontological, pragmatic and so on assumption that an Active Inference agent can assert is a concrete phenotype, an evolutionary niche emerging from the evolutionary interactions of the agent's genetics (initial source code) and environment (inputs to source code's development) Any thing, process, pattern a sensemaking agent or collective of agents can locate in its constructed spacetime is a statistical correlation between its internal and external states to reduce its uncertainity about the world to initialize uncertainity reducing internal metacognitive model and policies updates and external actions Most predictive structures are hieachical probabilistic bayesian multiscale metagraphs with links corresponding to predicted causality In biological agents, this uncertainity imperative can be futher granualized into maslow hiearchy of needs, reformulated as a interconnected nodes corresponding to different homeostatic subagents with goals that through collective behavior form higher order goals across scales about individual or collective uncertainity reduction They correspond to nested holographic quantum reference frames, attractors in quantum nonequilibrium thermodynamics Each statistical (dynamical) markov blanket corresponding to a thing has its own implementational level, such as animal, neuron, functional brain region, molecule, fundamental particle and so on Various models or (differential) equations in various fields studying physical systems study some local very concretely implemented subset of all those global general dynamics, they're some evolutionary learned bayesian phenotype, some attractor, some markov blanket, some thing stable in (usefully constructed) space and time, or beyond spacetime in various fundamental models in physics Quantum free energy principle tells us that for other systems for communication measurable physical classical information lives on a markov blanket boundary of a system and correponds to the internal system's dynamics, taken from the holographic principle in physics [ActInf Livestream #040.0 ~ "A free energy principle for generic quantum systems" - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qZYxSbJ38E) https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/991777324301299742/1136077006786793622/image.png?width=1076&height=605 Lets create a hypergraph of all natural and nonnatural disciplines? Any agent's model can be understood in terms of FEP as uncertainity reducing structured learned correlations in a bayesian graph serving as approximations of its external dynamics Making FEP a framework that can already can encompass every thing [Branches of science - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branches_of_science) This way, all science agents emerge from FEP as evolutionary niches through (collective) cognitive science generalized into any kind of symbolic and nonsymbolic mental frameworks In this frame, constructing a physical theory of everything looks at what niches of uncertainity are various fields reducing and attempts to synthetize them by finding correspondences between the mathematical structures Its fitting curves in data all way down [‘Machine Scientists’ Distill the Laws of Physics From Raw Data | Quanta Magazine](https://www.quantamagazine.org/machine-scientists-distill-the-laws-of-physics-from-raw-data-20220510/) If one goes fully general, without introducing FEP assumptions, one can assume that the whole universe is an one structure and each field is sculping certain substructure with more global or local models and laws Adding global constrains to this structure sculps parts of it (aka model/reduce uncertainity about it) Such as "only predictive models", "only mathematical models", "only quantum models", "only classical models in spacetime", "only models in physicalist ontology", "models correspond to some local realist objective structure", "models are just nonlocal relational parts of mental interface", "only models in complex adaptive systems frame", "taking in account existence of scales and emergence", "taking in account levels of analysis (are they just different parts of the system/abstractions?)" One cn expand the whole universe assumption to any words in general to include everything philosophy At the same time, philosophy can be understood as uncertainity reducing structures in cognitive science GPT4's list: Natural Sciences: Biology Physics Chemistry Earth Sciences Space Sciences Social Sciences: Sociology Psychology Political Science Anthropology Economics Humanities: History Literature Philosophy Arts Linguistics Formal Sciences: Mathematics Statistics Computer Science Systems Science Decision Theory Applied Sciences: Engineering Health Science Business Education Law Interdisciplinary Studies: Complex adaptive systems Environmental Studies Global Studies Biotechnology Data Science I wonder if global graph of knowledge could be automatized by: fusing all lists of fields on the internet or science journals taking all text on the internet that comes up when searching for the field name analyzing the statistical text/theme overlap to quantify relatedness finding interdisciplionary fields by seeing how two concrete fields' text fuse together statistically? finding labels for sets of fields by dimensionality reduction algorithms? Let's construct science fields bottom up inside complex physical systems with various scales frame Each single pattern, process, thing (having a markov blanket) is totally unique on its own and study of it can be its own totally concrete scientific field by futher abstraction we get fields that study various phenotypes Reductive fundamental physics studies everything existing at the smallest possible scale By looking into emergence of patterns from one scale to another such as emergence of spacetime or biology from fundamental particle physics, we interconnect various scales and thus basically create more interdisciplionarity Complex adaptive systems is extremely interdisciplionary, but still starts with certain assumptions The only field that is totally global across all fields is technically a blank canvas, nothing, no information, because any information assumes constrains Abstraction is great for putting high level less context/scale dependant patterns into language and maths Depending on what level of abstraction one does engineering, one operates with a field that is that level of abstraction Blank canvas includes all languages Each language can contain many concrete structures, philosophical, scientific, laymen etc. Language can also be seen as just informtion theoretic communication protocol between agents for model exchange Free energy principle just seems as the most pragmatic metalanguage All human knowledge framed inside the free energy principle Free energy principle is general ontology and language for information processing in physics and individual and collective sensemaking Permanent death, dissolving all strong priors on how predicted model of experience should be different, strong attraction toward any types of consciousness states in permanent homeostatic equilibrium without strong emotional mental forces wanting change [THE ROOT OF ALL SUFFERING - How To Never Get Triggered Again/Dissolving Thots & Negative Emotions - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5jCWTjXkC8) https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/991777324301299742/1136161722651119666/image.png?width=717&height=286 All things, processes, patterns, structure in experience are just by genetics and environment evolutionary niches that serve as individual and collective error correcting uncertainity reducing software in an interface - self model, hiearchical goals, phenomenal space and time We can use the amplituhedron or loop quantum gravity or spacetime as quantum error correcting code or Sean Carrol's model or quantum free energy principle or other mathematical model in physics with emergent spacetime as a spacetime background free model with objective or relational philosophical interpretations to model emergent neurophenomenological spacetime as optical error correcting code organizing classical information in memories for better evolutionary fitness and its functional disintegration in deconstructive meditation/psychedelics/transcendental philosophy, loss of symmetry breaking that feels good, symmetry theory of valence, that evolved as some symmetry breaking not needed anymore implies some uncertainity category was succesfully mininized, done implicitly by annealing often, modern society suffers from too much diverse symmetry breaking leading to global desynchrony in language and goals leading to too much competition leading to the metacrisis Getting enlightened is about "looking" for the sources of thermodynamic symmetry breakings aka concrete restricting categorizing knotty sector dividing structure generators and dissolving them this way including the global asymmetry of the looker, doer and perciever in a spacetime with a center until none of those structures are generated anymore and there's almost no more global stressing and resistance to the flow of energy and annealing tends to do this implicitly also in the subconscious processes and sometimes making them conscious giving the ability to manipulate with them consciouly. Experience is made of lighcones - local self and global attention arrows, awareness itself constructing space and time. Turn those lightcones to themselves or to eachother until "start" and "end" gets so correlated that it explodes into a bubble or into entropic structurelessness. All structure can be dissolved by underfitting rewriting, overwhelming explosion, irrelevance destabilization, or not giving it attention overtime that it dies unsupported on its own. Getting enlightened is about "looking" for the sources of thermodynamic symmetry breakings aka concrete restricting categorizing knotty dividing structure generators and dissolving them this way including the global asymmetry of the looker, doer and perciever in a spacetime with a center until none of those structures are generated anymore and there's almost no more global stressing and resistance to the flow of energy and annealing tends to do this implicitly also in the subconscious processes and sometimes making them conscious giving the ability to manipulate with them consciouly. Experience is made of lighcones, local self and global attention arrows, awareness itself constructing spacetime. Turn those lightcones to themselves or to eachother until "start" and "end" gets so correlated that it explodes into a bubble or into entropic structurelessness. All structure can be dissolved by underfitting rewriting, overwhelming explosion, irrelevance destabilization, or not giving it attention overtime that it dies unsupported on its own. Since representatives and overall influental people with lots of power in our system all have public emails, could meaningful pressure on solving the polycrisis/metacrisis be done by mass emailing them all using language they understand the most? (language of money, power, their ideology, their values and so on) This is how one guy in Prague basically controls how bicycle infrastructure is buiilt, by contacting and moving politicians, project managers and project realizers or people. :D [Just Look At The Thing! – How The Science of Consciousness Informs Ethics — EA Forum Bots](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bvtAXefTDQgHxc9BR/just-look-at-the-thing-how-the-science-of-consciousness) [The Symmetry Theory of Valence 2020 Overview](https://qri.org/blog/symmetry-theory-of-valence-2020) What are your ethics? i call my ethics approximate practical utilitariasm such that edge cases and unrealistic scenarios that wouldnt be compatible with the current system that can be mathematically optimal are taken out (plus taking in account the limiting power of the models) for example if you assume negative utilitarism and some buddhist notions that all concrete life is suffering then the optimal utilitarian move is to get rid of all concrete life to prevent any futher suffering lol and if suffering is futher generalized by asymmetries in panpsychist framework then the optimal utilitarian move is to theoretically convert the whole universe into zero structure absolutely symmetrical state more generally if we mathematize psychological valence, it seems that where the line saying this is neutral valence, between positive and negative valence, where its set seems to be arbitrary if we assume different buddhistic notions (or other framework's notions) where positive valence exists too, then its about maximizing that utility, though in the panpsychist symmetry formalism its again creating as much symmetries in physics as possible 5-MeO-DMT trips or Jhanas that are meditative states are with almost no structure, with the least amount of symmetry breaking in experience, which seems to be measured in the brain as well to a first approximation, and I also dont know any other states of consciousness that feel as good as those assuming the utility we maximize is psychological valence under those formalisms though pragmatically we need to take in account the whole societal system's all sort of natural laws, game theoretic survivability, ressilience, stability, progression out of bad local minimas and so on Jeden kamarád systematicky má celkem úšpěšně kontrolu nad tím jak v Praze probíhá proces výstavy cyklistický infrastruktury přes online/offline systematický ovlivňování všech částí toho procesu - komunikace s politiky, manažerama na různých úrovních, nebo přímo realizátoři či jiný úředníci a lidi. Vzhledem k tomu že taková tuna systémově vlivných lidí má veřejný maily nebo jiný přímý nebo nepřímý možnosti komunikace s nima nebo jiný možnosti posílání zpráv k nim, přemýšlím že bych víc systematicky a možná masově (šlo by to částečně zautomatizovat?) takhle posílal maily nebo nějak i víc přímo irl komunikoval s lidmi co jsou mají největší influenci ohledně polykrize a mají možnost s ní něco víc dělat (ideálně po celým světě no) a co nejvíc v co jejich kompatibilním jazyce tím že člověk respektuje to že jich dost mluví v jazyce peněz, či jiný moci (např že jim věří lidi, kulturní moc?), v ideologii, nebo v jazyce hodnot či co vidí za nejvíc (eticky) důležitý (některým záleží na budoucnosti světa jejich dětí, některým tak ne), nebo i ta malá část vlivných mluví v jazyce vědy :thinking: