![[Main Page]](/cosmos3.png)
This is a work in progress and is of draft quality.
Written by User:NSK, NSK Nikolaos S. Karastathis, http://karastathis.org/ nsk@karastathis.org
Copyright (C) 2008 by Nikolaos S. Karastathis.
The text of this page, except any short direct quotations clearly delimited, is available under the GNU Free Documentation License version 1.2 as published by the Free Software Foundation.
Licensing terms: GFDLv1.2, as follows:
Copyright (c) 2008 Nikolaos S. Karastathis Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 only; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU Free Documentation License".
To get the licence go to http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html
If you copy this work without preserving the history of this document and the name of the original author, the original author may perceive your action as a copyright licence violaton, based on their interpretation of the GFDLv1.2 which requires the preservation of the history of documents.
The history of this document on CosmosWiki is preserved automatically at http://cosmoswiki.org/index.php?title=Swarm_theory_of_everything&action=history
A manual history section will be included in the document.
This is a self-published (or self-archived) work made by the author and archived on his personal WWW space.
This work has not been peer-reviewed. Do NOT use any information found in this document without checking the facts yourself first!
You can cite as: Karastathis and Anonymous (2008)
and in the references section:
Nikolaos S. Karastathis and Anonymous (2008). Swarm theory of everything. http://cosmoswiki.org/index.php/Swarm_theory_of_everything
The last name of the author is Karastathis, the middle initial is S. (with a full stop) and the first name is Nikolaos. If your referencing style requires the last name first, you can use: Karastathis Nikolaos S. or Karastathis N. S. or Karastathis, Nikolaos S.
The Anonymous is another person who helped in tis inquiry.
The author welcomes abbreviation of their name as NSK in your main text. For example: NSK and Anonymous (2008).
If you cite the author, feel free to send them email as they like to keep track of their citations. Of course, you are welcome to cite without sending any email as well!
If you find an error, fix it yourself or contact the author.
Nature of the document: This is a collection of quick notes kept after an oral argument with another person (Anonymous).
Feel free to use this as a base to develop a full article on this issue.
Document identifier: cr2c2v0.1a1
Earthquake swarms.
Swarms in businesses.
Swarms in online communities.
Swarm intelligence in social insects.
Swarming in brain neurons.
Swarming in human societies.
Swarms in cities.
Swarming in galaxies.
Swarming in electrons.
Everything we look, we see swarms.
Swarms within swarms.
Could a unified theory of swarming explain everything?
Could a swarm theory of everything unify gravity, electromagnetism, electronuclear force, etc..?
Imagine being able to derive equations applying on all kinds and sizes of swarms. From insect swarms to bird swarms to galaxy swarms to atomic swarms. Could these swarm equations provide the theoretical glue necessary to explain all natural phenomena?
From nanoscale to grandscale, there are swarms everywhere.
Nature is a swarm.
Could swarming be a basic building block of nature? A basic truth?
Swarm: A collection of many entities and their communications
Is it the communication that makes the swarm?
Could there be an invisible hand?
Could this invisible hand be an algorithm or equation running in a mathematical space behind our reality or in parallel with it?
Could Rechnender Raum or Calculating Space (Digital Physics) be applied on this concept?
Plato's world of ideas.
Pythagoras.
Tegmark's Mathematical Universe paper.
Our universe as a simulation.
Self-aware mathematical entities.
Birds swarm, but what if the birds are merely shadows of mathematical algorithms running in a calculating space?
The algorithms in a mathematical dimension have a broader field of view than the birds.
If the birds are commanded by an algorithm running externally to the physical reality, then they should be able to find food quickly without random walks.
Ants and snails do random walks.
But the small creatures do not find food automatically. They do so with random walks. Therefore they are either not commanded by an algorithm or the algorithm has no broader field of view than the small creatures.
Insects do random walks because of hyperactivity generated by hunger.
Self-aware mathematical entities.
We are self-aware mathematics, and the mathematics use swarming equations.
The idea that there is a mathematical reality behind the physical reality is not science, it's philosophy and mysticism.
Perhaps communication (stigmergy) would be sufficient to explain swarming with no need for an invisible hand, therefore no need for mathematical algorithm.
small swarms versus large swarms.
Observed bird flocks: A small flock needed two individual birds at different placed to turn to the right at the same time and after a second all of the 7-8 birds of the flock did the same. But another large flock moved entirely concurrently with no noticeable "early adopter" birds.
The larger the swarm is, the more it looks like a swarm.
Swarming as a distributed algorithm running in the brains of the individuals.
Human bodies as swarms of cells.
Cells do not know about the human.
Humans do not exist, only individual cells exist. Humans are just the emergent phenomenon of the cells.
Swarms do not exist. Only individuals and communications exist. No individuals, no swarming.
Could we produce a swarm theory of everything? If we can prove that there exists at least one physical phenomenon with no swarming explanation then we can prove that no swarm theory of everything can ever be constructed.
Boundaries of universe.
Boundaries of universe defined as the end of spacetime dimensions.
What about more than 4 dimensions?
We focus on the whole universe, not the observable universe, therefore c (the speed of light) is of no concern.
Universe as a bubble.
Multiple universes.
The nature of dimensions.
Dimension = existence ?
Dimension = potential for movement ?
Dimension = measurability ?
Dimension means measurability.
What does no dimension mean?
Does a point with no dimensions exist?
Universe ends at the end of spacetime or all of its dimensions.
At the point where dimensions cease, existence ceases as well.
What if the universe was composed of islands of dimensions within a sea of non-dimensions?
If we can prove that a point with no dimensions exists, then this means we cannot explain everything mathematically.
If we cannot explain everything mathematically, then perhaps swarming is not universal because swarming has so much to do with mathematics.
But we can explain a non-dimensional point with mathematics. Just use imaginary numbers instead of natural numbers. Or use other symbols and no numerical values at all.
Godel's incompleteness theorems.
Godel's first incompleteness theorem.
Godel's second incompleteness theorem.
Applications of Godel's theorems on politics and postmodernist philosophy are bogus.
Godel's theorems are simply about mathematics.
Lucas's extension of Godel's theorems imply no theory of everything is ever possible.
We don't believe in Lucas's extension.
Can a telescope observe itself?
We only partly accept Godel's theorems, and only regarding theoretical mathematical logic. Any application or implication outside mathematics is of no meaning.
If something is 99.999999999999999999999% assured, it is practically indistinguishable from 100%.
Therefore we do not take Godel's theorems as an indication that no theory of everything is possible.
Therefore we can continue seeking a theory of everything.
And such a theory of everything could lie in swarming.
Can we prove that a phenomenon cannot be explained with swarming?
Swarming in quarks.
What is under the quark?
Do atoms exist?
If atoms exist, then a swarming theory of everything might be impossible.
Swarming explains populations. An atom is not a population. Therefore swarming does not explain atoms.
But Atomism could be wrong.
Perhaps matter can be cut infinitely small.
If atoms do not exist, then swarming could explain everything.
Natural philosophy.