The Fundamental Universe-Generating Processes and Subparticles Do Not Contradict the Emerging Properties Concept
[Note: In this important article, it is necessary that I use a few terms taken from [1]. Further, a few very simple mathematical forms are utilized. The "reductionism" discussion follows the new "universe construction" outline.]
Recall the following definitions.
(1) A defined physical-system is a collection of named physical objects, the constituents, which are so related as to form an identifiable whole. Specific relations between the constituents are the basis for establishing the behavior of the entire structure.
From the mathematically viewpoint, definition (1) can apply to a single physical-system as a whole, where the constituents, if any, are ignored. Viewed in this form, then, mathematically, the empty set is the set of constituents. Since the set of constituents is the empty set, there are no relations between the constituents. Hence, the set of all such relations is also the empty set.
(2) A "description" (when digitized an "image") is a generalized string of symbols that corresponds to human-sensory impressions. These impressions include observable machine sensory-information. The term "description" is considered synonymous with the term specific information, since descriptions are use as but representations for specific information.(3) Given a term that has a definition which includes a set of properties P. The *term (hyperterm) has a similar set of properties P' when discussed in a special way. But, when the sets of properties are compared, then there can be significant differences between the P and P' properties.
(4) An "operator" D represents a set of processes. These processes can take place in various domains or regions. The properties that D satisfies, usually, represent properties that the processes possess.
(5) The term "physical" refers to observable or assumed constituents or processes within our universe as accepted by secular science-communities. For this article, no constituents of the "substratum" [1, pp. 106, 170] are considered as physical. [For other applications, the substratum might be considered as physical.] If substratum entities or processes behave like physical constituents or processes, then the term "physical-like" may be used.
(6) An "ultraword" is a substratum object that behaves like a super-compressed collection of descriptions. It is like a "zip" file or one of other forms of compressed data.
**In the following sketch, first consider the formation of an object taken from a collection of universes, where each is considered as a physical-system (a library [1, p. 156]). Think of this as the production of the information contained in the illustrated DVDs [1, p. 159]. The entire universe-generating process is broken into steps and the mathematically represented subparticles are used as a fundamental step in the algorithm-styled process.In condensed format, the most general form for the universe generation process begins with an ultimate ultraword W [1. pp. 101, 106]. The W is obtained from a "purely random" sequence of descriptions. The ultraword W is composed of physical-like *descriptions and physical descriptions. There is an operator S [1, p. 104] that takes a finite collection of physical descriptions and separates the collection into the individual pieces. The next step is application of the ultralogic *S to W. This operator decomposes the W into individual descriptions, as well as, individual *descriptions. This is followed by application of the *finite *ordered-choice operator *O that yields, in a step-by-step manner, an ordered sequence d' of descriptions and *descriptions - an "event sequence." (The general term event sequence, usually, includes the *event sequence as well.) Next, the *finite subparticle combining operator G is applied. Lastly, the "standard part operator" st is applied. This yields the step-by-step generation of any universe. In symbolic form, given an ultraword W, the ordered composition st(G(*O(*S({W})))) = C({W}) yields a developing universe. The part *O(*S({W})) yields the *finite sequence and each member of a library. When st G is applied, then a physical realization for a universe, with all of its subphysical-systems, occurs at a moment in primitive time.
Although, in general, the members of the original W are obtained in a purely random way, for our universe, there is a special relation that exists between the successive members of d' that represent physical events.
Assume a basic stance accepted by secular science-communities. The production of all defined physical-systems and alterations in their behavior is controlled by a collection of comprehensible physical laws and physical theories. It is known that, in this case, the standard portion of this *ordered-choice process is generated, in a step-by-step manner, by the unification U [1, p. 186, the capital omega is *U] for all these physical laws and theories as established in The Best Possible Unification for any Collection of Physical Theories [Result 3.8]. Coupled with U are the ultralogic operators Pi = Pi(P(p(m))) that generate physical events that satisfy various Probability Models.
Due to participator alterations, there is a collection of these unifications and (Pi*U) represents any member of this collection. What this symbol means is the *U is applied first then Pi is applied. In modern physical science, it is claimed that all physical behavior is probabilistic in character and, in all cases, Pi would apply. However, Pi can also be utilized if a specific science-community requires that specific physical behavior be certain (i.e. 100% probable). Let F(i) denote a description. If it is assumed that our universe "began" with of an event E(0), then, for the descriptions and *descriptions, the universe-generating pattern is,
(Pi*U)F(0), . . .,(Pi*U)(F(i)) = F(i+1), (Pi*U)(F(i+1)) = F(i+2), . . . . If it is assumed that there is no standard "beginning" relative to the standard notion of a sequence of physical events, then it has been shown that there may be a "nonstandard" beginning, denoted by j, to the sequence that yields the physical events. In this case, there exist *descriptions and descriptions that "begin" with F(j). This yields the pattern
(Pi*U)F(j), . . .,(Pi*U)(F(i)) = F(i+1), (Pi*U)(F(i+1)) = F(i+2), . . . . For the first pattern, when a specific member of a library is selected [1, p. 163], then each description F(i) is used along with processes that combine ultrasubparticles to produce a subparticle H(i). The final step in the process is application of the standard part to H(i). This results in the physical realization of the F(i), a physical event as represented by E(i). If the second pattern holds, then, for physical events, the subparticle processes and application of the st operator are restricted to the physical universe portion of the event sequence. Again due to the existence of ultranatural laws and theories, we can have little or no knowledge as to the exact events being generated by the (Pi*U)(F(j)), . . ., portion of the sequence. Elsewhere, there are speculations as to their purpose.**
The above represents an algorithm and it is used as a way to comprehend the process. But, due to the lack of knowledge aspects of the GGU-model and the model's analogue character, this described algorithm need not be the actual way that F(i) is transformed into E(i). The entire process or portions can be considered, in their entity, as a single process.
A science-community can defined a universe as composed of various physical-systems. In this case, the *S applied to W yields the ultrawords W(k) for each defined physical-system. The same ** process, applied to each of the W(k), generates from E(i,k) the event E((i+1,k). These results, for each defined physical-system, would be the exact same results as obtained from W.
In the following, the intelligently designed interpretation is detailed.
The following describes, in general terms without the operator language, the GID-model mathematically obtained higher-intelligence conclusions.
1. Our universe as a whole is designed and produced by actions taken by a higher-intelligence.
2. Every defined elementary object such as electrons and the like are designed and produced by the same higher-intelligence.
3. Every combination of elementary objects to form any other physical object is designed and produced by the same higher-intelligence. Examples: a hydrogen atom, water, an ocean, the world, the solar system, our galaxy, etc.
4. Based upon physical laws or theories, every physical change in the behavior of every system composed of physical objects is controlled by the same higher-intelligence. (Controlled does not mean personal choice is removed. Statement 1 always applies even if there are no known physical laws or theories that yield physical changes or basic patterns.) Example, objects move from one position to another, water temperature change, indeed, anything that changes its known physical characteristics, appearance, etc.
5. The same higher-intelligence also intelligently designs the statement 4 physical changes.
6. This higher-intelligence can design and produce our universe in a manner that follows a strict (literal) interpretation of the creation statements make in Genesis 1. Example: things appear suddenly in mature form, water, light, dry land, or objects formed during but one 24-hour day even without sunlight. This higher-intelligence can also design our universe so as to correspond to any of the proposed cosmologies.
****The previous 6 statements summarize conclusions obtained from interpreted characteristics of the previous formal operators. For this more formal outline, as in the secular sketch, an arbitrary member of a library is considered. In [1], each W and applicable W(k) results from of a pre-designed sequence of physical event descriptions {F(i)}. It is shown that this determines another designed event sequence that contains *descriptions distinct from the descriptions that are still present. Hence, in this case, the sequential members are generated, in a general way, by a higher-intelligence H [1]. The H denotes a higher-intelligence that designs every aspect of the GGU-model. Certain of the higher-intelligence processes exhibited by H, when restricted to a physical universe, model specific human mental processes. It is not difficult to show that no biological entity within any universe can replicate the universe-generating H processes.The S operator is intelligently designed and, when applied, exhibits an intelligent agent signature. The *S is intelligently designed and displays, upon application, a higher-intelligence signature. The *finite *ordered-choice operator *O is designed and applied by a higher-intelligence and, in restricted form, is equivalent to the human mental process of placing a finite set of objects into a specific order. The basic notion of "combining hyprefinitely many ultrasubparticles," although mathematically represented by operator G, is a higher-intelligence process that when restricted to our physical world is equivalent to the human process of combining finitely many objects from a set in order to obtain, for a specific purpose, a specified number of objects. The universe is not generated by the (Pi*U) in the sense described in **. The production of an event, whether standard or nonstandard, and alterations in the behavior of each physical-system, displays a higher-intelligence signature in that the production of or alteration in a physical-system is equivalent to application of the (Pi*U) operator, where U is a restriction of the ultralogic *U. This shows, in a more specific manner, how each member of an event sequence is designed by a higher-intelligence so as to correspond to the intelligence displayed, the U operator signature, by some biological entities.
Application of the "st" operator displays a higher-intelligence signature. The higher-intelligence signature displayed by the Pi operator, even in restriction form, is not that displayed by any biological entity within a universe. What all of this signifies for our specific universe is that each step in its development is designed by a higher-intelligence and the production of and alterations in the behavior of each physical-system is the result of a higher-intelligence.****
Summary in terms of operators.
(1) The construction of each W and W(k) by a higher-intelligence,
(2) the design of operators S, *S, G, *G, O, *O, G, U, *U and Pi by a higher-intelligence,
(3) the display of a higher-intelligence signature when *S, *G, *O, G, *U and Pi are applied,
(4) the higher-intelligence signature displayed when the operator st is applied
(5) and evidence
imply that, in all cases, a higher-intelligence is the direct and ultimate cause for the production of and alterations in the behavior of each physical-system within our universe.
The Bible describes God's creationary processes linguistically. In terms of linguistic notions, W has the same properties as a higher-language "word" and models "rhema" as used in Hebrews 1:3. Hence, C transforms a "rhema" into F(i). At the time when specific Biblical creationary-statements were originally presented, how could this linguistic model for creation be understood? The properties of the operator C can be considered as a model for the idea that the term "command" means "to direct with authority." Hence, C directs W to form into F. Further, depending upon the circumstances, the Biblically word used for "to speak" can be defined as "to think." These two interpretations are modeled by the GGU-model processes. For example,
"And God said, Let there be . . . ." (Genesis 1),
". . . for he commanded, and they were created." (Psalm 148:5).
I have mentioned previously that the term "subparticles" need not, in general, refer to "particles" in a physical sense. The term is rather unfortunate and I should have retained the original term "infants" or something else. Note that in relativistic cosmology even galaxies can be "represented" by the particle notion - a galactic gas or point masses.
There are various notions termed as "reductionism." One major form of reductionism is the claim that every physical event that exists is produced by a small number of basic substances that behave in describable ways. Further, such describable behavior leads directly to the behavior of each physical event. A major claim comes from the particle physics community. This claim states that every physical event in every physical science field, at least, should be reducible to a specific collection of defined elementary objects and their interactions. Further, it is these interactions that lead to the behavior of each physical-system. Other philosophies of science reject the "every physical event" portion of these claims. Rather, it is believed that certain physical properties "emerge" only when a more complex system is analyzed. These emerging properties cannot be produced through application of the properties that regulate a more fundamental level. Are subparticles related to a reductionism?
I have emphatically stated that subparticles are typically considered as only operational in content. Within physical science, a physical object, whether it exists on a fundamental level or as a complex system, differs from another such object in that it has different physical characteristics. These differences are based upon physical measurements, descriptions or human or machine sensory-impressions. The prefix "sub," in the term subparticle, refers to characteristics represented by measured quantities or by human or machine sensory-impressions. By an encoding, all such characteristics are represented "numerically." The "ultrasubparticle" is a mathematical way to represent, in a distinctive way, each of the basic characteristics that will operationally yield the characteristics for a specific physical event.
What does the phrase "operationally yield" mean? Subparticles may be deemed as but one of the fundamental steps for the universe-generating process. This means that the rules that direct subparticle formation, although related to a real procedure, are described mathematically in such a way that the objects to which the rules apply are not detailed in physical terms. I have presented [1, p. 127] an "illustration" for subparticle formation that is not intended to be an actual physical description. How a universe is generated depends upon the scenario selected. Subparticles are used for all of the scenarios. Due to the notion of the ultranatural laws [1, pp.. 127, 147] (part of the lack of knowledge model), descriptions for certain of the scenarios must remain somewhat vague.
The properties that govern subparticle formation do not lead to the properties that direct physical-system behavior. Hence, assuming that they may represent actual universe-generating substratum objects does not contradict the philosophy of emerging properties. Depending upon the theory used, their combinations could represent actual physical objects at various levels. But, these levels need not include most of the subatomic realm. The combinations could represent directly observed physical-systems. I simply state that such objects might exist. If one wishes to assume that subparticles exist in a physical-like sense within the substratum, then every physical object that exists within our universe would be indirect evidence for this hypothesis.
[1] Herrmann, R. A. 2002. Science Declares Our Universe IS Intelligently Designed, Xulon Press, Fairfax Va and other addresses.
Note: For the actual mathematical statements that lead the above two displayed sequences, see this PDF file.