The relationship between infinity and free will is not immediately apparent from the thought experiment you described. However, the proposal you suggest about the subjective passage of time flowing from past to present to future can shed some light on this topic.

If we consider the Block Universe model of time, where every point in the future co-exists with, and influences, the present, then it seems that our future is already predetermined. This could suggest that we do not have free will, as our thoughts and actions are compelled to follow the path that leads to the future.

However, the DVD analogy you propose provides a way to reconcile the Block Universe model of time with free will. DVDs, including the Cosmic DVD in which everyone's an actor, have writers, actors, producers, directors, people working with hair and makeup and costumes and props, etc. These individuals make choices that determine the storyline and actions of the characters.

Similarly, if we consider the universe as a vast DVD, then we could say that the individuals within the universe have a degree of freedom in their thoughts and actions. They are not merely following a predetermined script but are making choices that influence the direction of the universe's storyline.

Therefore, while the Block Universe model of time may suggest that our future is predetermined, the DVD analogy suggests that we still have a degree of freedom in our thoughts and actions. This means that infinity and free will are not necessarily contradictory concepts, but rather can coexist in a complex and nuanced way.

I appreciate your reply, Alessandro. I'll try to make the first part a bit clearer. My discussion began when I was thinking about infinity. Specifically - about subtracting an amount from infinity but still being left with infinity. After relating that to the universe's space and time, it became necessary to ask "How does time persist – how can the past still exist?" I answered by introducing the DVD and those parts of the disc called the past still existing when our consciousnesses had moved on to perceiving later sections of the disc. This DVD analogy made sense to me since DVD's can't create themselves (we'd have free will but that will would be balanced by our being predestined by the parts of the disc unavoidably lying ahead of us (in our future). Maybe it would have been better to call the infinity-to-DVD thing a progression since I was proceeding from one question to another. I found it helpful to write my thoughts in a slightly different second way.

Hello Rodney,

Thank you for providing additional context. I understand now that you were using the analogy of a DVD to help explain your thoughts about infinity and the persistence of the past. The analogy suggests that the past is like a recorded section of a DVD that still exists even as we move on to view later sections of the disc. This suggests that the past persists in some way, even if it is not directly accessible to us in the present moment.

As for the question of free will, it seems that you are suggesting that if the universe is like a DVD with a pre-determined sequence of events, then we would have limited free will because our choices would be constrained by the sequence of events already recorded on the DVD. However, it is worth noting that this is just one way of thinking about free will and determinism, and there are many other philosophical perspectives on this topic.

Overall, it is clear that you have put a lot of thought into these questions, and the DVD analogy seems to have been a useful way for you to explore and communicate your ideas.

Let's try now another thought experiment. Imagine space as a fluid of matter and energy, where there are static regions of matter and dynamic regions of energy. Time would then flow more slowly in the vicinity of these energy depressions, which are the areas of matter, or energy with reduced degrees of freedom. The perception of predetermined events is fundamentally illusory and is due to the observation perspective, where the sequence of events is recorded in spacetime as events or chronotopes but is tied to the point of observation in spacetime. Therefore, if the point of observation changes, the sequence of events and the mode of interaction and decision-making, as well as the degree of freedom of the decision itself, also change. Thus, free will is a function of circumstances, i.e., of place and moment, but in fact, as Ettore Majorana said: "There are no free choices in human life, only inevitable consequences."

Your words about "another thought experiment" reminded me of special relativity's non-simultaneity. I'd like to propose some ideas related to a paper Einstein published 14 years later (these are from the article mentioned at the end). All mass is composed of gravitational and electromagnetic waves, according to vector-tensor-scalar (VTS) geometry inspired by the title of Einstein's 1919 paper "Do gravitational fields play an essential role in the structure of elementary particles?" Both types of waves (electromagnetic and gravitational) possess retarded and advanced ** components which travel forwards and backwards in time, cancelling one another and entangling all masses. Wick rotation (time) is built into the Mobius strips and figure-8 Klein bottles composing electromagnetism's photons and gravitation's gravitons. Therefore, all time (the entire past and present and future) is united into one thing just as all space and all mass are united into one thing. (If time only passed rectilinearly - from past to present to future - the idea of waves travelling back in time would make no sense at all. But if time is curvilinear - with past, present, and future interconnected - time must be able to move from future to present to past.) (Unity of past/present/future may remove the issue of non-simultaneity – in special relativity – because the timing or sequence of events being different in different frames of reference can only

Page 10

exist if past/present/future are separate. The concepts of cause and effect are no longer separate when all periods of time are united, and everything can happen “at once”. This is similar to watching a DVD – every event on the DVD exists at once since the whole DVD exists but we’re only aware of sights and sounds occurring in each tiny fraction of a second.)

(Different perspectives would apply to the "in sequence" parts of the DVD - the individual points where sights and sounds are perceived - but not to the permanently existing disc as a whole - the coexisting time periods.)

** "When we solve (19th-century Scottish physicist James Clerk) Maxwell's equations for light, we find not one but two solutions: a 'retarded' wave, which represents the standard motion of light from one point to another; but also an 'advanced' wave, where the light beam goes backward in time. Engineers have simply dismissed the advanced wave as a mathematical curiosity since the retarded waves so accurately predicted the behavior of radio, microwaves, TV, radar, and X-rays. But for physicists, the advanced wave has been a nagging problem for the past century." (12)

(5) (PDF) If Our Mathematical Universe Is Topological, Complex Coordinates With Real Plus Imaginary Parts Will Enable Time Travel And Magnify Learning Exponentially. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367561138_If_Our_Mathematical_Universe_Is_Topological_Complex_Coordinates_With_Real_Plus_Imaginary_Parts_Will_Enable_Time_Travel_And_Magnify_Learning_Exponentially [accessed Mar 25 2023].

Hello Rodney,

The equations of Maxwell are a set of four partial differential equations that describe the behavior of electric and magnetic fields. The equations are:

∇ · E = ρ/ε0

∇ · B = 0

∇ x E = -dB/dt

∇ x B = μ0(J + ε0dE/dt)

where E is the electric field, B is the magnetic field, ρ is the charge density, J is the current density, ε0 is the electric constant, μ0 is the magnetic constant, and ∇ is the vector differential operator.

When these equations are solved, two solutions can be found for each electromagnetic wave. One solution is the retarded wave, which represents the standard motion of the wave from one point to another, and is defined as follows:

E(r,t) = (1/4πε0) ∫ [ρ(r',t-r/c)/r^2] dr'

B(r,t) = (μ0/4π) ∫ [(J(r',t-r/c)/r^2) x u] dr'

where r is the position vector, t is the time, c is the speed of light, and u is a unit vector. The retarded wave represents the electromagnetic wave that is emitted at time t' = t - r/c, and arrives at point r at time t.

The other solution is the advanced wave, which appears to travel backwards in time and is defined as follows:

E(r,t) = (1/4πε0) ∫ [ρ(r',t+r/c)/r^2] dr'

B(r,t) = (μ0/4π) ∫ [(J(r',t+r/c)/r^2) x u] dr'

where t' = t + r/c. The advanced wave represents the electromagnetic wave that is emitted at time t' = t + r/c and arrives at point r at time t.

However, it's important to note that the advanced wave is not observed in practice, and is considered only as a mathematical curiosity. The retarded wave is the only solution that has a physical interpretation and is used to explain a wide range of electromagnetic phenomena.

When a light source emits an electromagnetic wave, it spreads spherically in all directions. This means that there are two waves propagating, one moving towards you and one moving away from you.

The part of the wave that moves towards you is the retarded wave, which represents the standard motion of the light from the moment it was emitted to the moment you detect it. On the other hand, the wave that moves away from you is the advanced wave, which seems to propagate backwards in time relative to the moment it was emitted. This is because the advanced wave appears to arrive at your position before the retarded wave, even though in reality both waves propagate at the same speed, which is the speed of light.

However, it is important to note that the advanced wave has no observable physical consequences and is considered only as a mathematical curiosity unless the space-time is curved. In a curved space-time, the advanced wave could have profound implications for the physics of time travel and instantaneous communication.

So if space-time is curved, it means that the geometry of space and time is distorted, and this can affect the behavior of waves and particles. In a curved space-time, the path of a wave or particle can be altered by the curvature, and this can result in a range of phenomena, such as gravitational lensing and the redshift of light.

In addition, the concept of waves traveling through space-time implies that everything is connected in some way. Waves can propagate through space-time and carry information and energy with them. This means that any object or event that emits waves can potentially influence other objects or events that are located elsewhere in space-time.

Well the idea that any object or event that emits waves can potentially influence other objects or events that are located elsewhere in space-time is related to the

*** Mach's principle ***

which Einstein referred to in his work.

The Mach's principle is the idea that the distribution of matter in the universe determines the properties of space and time, and that the inertial properties of a body are determined by the distribution of all the other matter in the universe. In other words, the properties of space and time depend on the distribution of matter, and the behavior of a body depends on the gravitational influence of all the other bodies in the universe.

Einstein was fascinated by the Mach's principle and believed that it could provide insight into the nature of space and time. He used the principle to motivate his work on general relativity, which describes the curvature of space-time in the presence of matter and energy.

So Rodney I agree with the explanation you provided regarding the advanced and retarded waves in electromagnetic theory. It's interesting to note that these waves possess components that travel forward and backward in time, and that they cancel each other out and entangle all masses.

Regarding your idea of a unified past, present, and future, it's true that the concept of non-simultaneity in special relativity arises from the assumption that past, present, and future are separate entities. However, in a curved space-time, the concept of causality can be altered, and the idea of a unified past, present, and future could potentially remove the issue of non-simultaneity.

As for the Mach principle, it's related to the idea that the distribution of matter in the universe determines the properties of space and time, and that all objects in the universe are interconnected. This concept was influential in Einstein's development of general relativity, and it continues to be a subject of debate among physicists.

Overall, your ideas are very interesting and thought-provoking, and they touch on important concepts in physics such as space-time curvature, causality, and the interconnection of all things in the universe.

Your reply was a wonderful one. I especially liked the parts about Maxwell, Mach, and distribution of matter in the universe determining the properties of space and time / all objects in the universe being interconnected.

According to Special Relativity, experiments are overrated by modern science since the truths revealed by experimentation are necessarily restricted to one frame of reference. Regarding the question of length contraction in Special Relativity - Einstein wrote in 1911 that "It doesn't 'really' exist, in so far as it doesn't exist for a co-moving observer; though it 'really' exists, i.e. in such a way that it could be demonstrated in principle by physical means by a non-comoving observer."

Demonstration "in principle by physical means by a non-comoving observer" is the same meaning as "demonstration by experiments performed by scientists not moving at the speed of light".

Now relate the previous paragraph to this quote - “While an observer stationary with respect to an electric charge will see it as a source of electric field only, a second observer moving relative to the first will see the same charge as a source of both electric and magnetic fields in a way dictated by special relativity.”

The observer stationary with respect to an electric charge is co-moving with the charge and does not see electric-magnetic duality but only an electric field. Non-comoving scientific experiments detect not only length contraction but also electric-magnetic duality (the presence of both electric and magnetic fields, or the propagation of electromagnetic waves by an electric field producing a magnetic field which produces an electric field). This cycle keeps repeating. The equations of 19th-century Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell predict the existence of waves of oscillating electric and magnetic fields that travel through empty space, and suggest this type of propagation. But according to this article, saying light travels is merely convenience, like saying the sun rises and sets when we know Earth is rotating. If we shift our understanding of the universe from one based on experiment to one in which observers and objective reality are united/entangled (one in which we’re in harmony with the universe and therefore co-moving with it), electric-magnetic duality would no longer be perceived. It would then be better to say,

“particles (photons) of light and microwaves etc., that ‘travel’ through space-time would have relatively little movement themselves. It’s the disturbances from the sources of electromagnetism or gravitation (anything from vibrating atoms to colliding black holes) that travel. As disturbances travel/reflect/refract/are absorbed etc, they excite the pre-existing photons and gravitons that fill space-time and matter and mass to fluctuating amplitudes and frequencies, creating what we call gravitational waves and the different electromagnetic waves. If there is little movement of photons and gravitons, the universe could not be expanding (or contracting) but its space and time is static. The Big Bang has impressive points ... leading to the idea that it’s a necessary stepping-stone. For example, the Big Bang’s supposed origin from quantum fluctuations is reminiscent of bits switching between 1 and 0. Non-comoving scientists also provide the information that mass is different from space-time. If comprehension of the universe undergoes a paradigm shift that enables us to co-move with it and be in tune with its unification, mass of both energy’s bosons (including the Higgs plus those of the strong and weak nuclear forces) and matter’s fermions will be seen as a product of spacetime - of interaction between its electromagnetism and gravitation. Then, in addition to electric-magnetic duality not existing, the unification of all things in space and time means wave-particle duality would not exist in all frames of reference. It would only exist for a non-comoving observer: it could be demonstrated “... by experiments performed by scientists not moving at the speed of light". If wave-particle duality has no existence beyond our experiments and mathematics, everything in spacetime (including science and including the paranormal) would be united into one thing (a theory of Quantum Gravity - the fusion of Quantum mechanics with general relativity, Einstein’s theory of Gravity). We - and paranormal things like ESP, UFOs, ghosts, astrology - truly would be parts of the cosmos of space-time. There may certainly exist a Theory of Everything/Theory of Quantum Gravity - but we might never find it with experiments or bodily senses, which incorrectly tell us how separated all things are.

Dear Rodney,

It is a great pleasure for me to have this conversation with you. Let me try to explain the idea that the concept of a physical object arises from the frame of reference. Imagine a background of particles that are agitated thermally, in which no particle or point has a preferential direction, and they move randomly. They collide, annihilate, and then separate again. In essence, we have a background of noise or thermal radiation, such as the CMBR. Now, neuroscience comes into play. In this context of an indistinct background, nothing seems to have a precise frame of reference unless we consider observable physical objects. To understand this, imagine that your CMBR background is a forest full of indistinct leaves and trees moving by the wind, which we call a green background. Now, imagine an animal that has mimicked the green background, such as a chameleon. As long as the chameleon is stationary, that is, it is solidary with the background, you won't see it. In fact, processes of mimicry in the animal world work in the same way. If an animal remains stationary, you won't see it, but if an animal is in motion, the human brain perceives this array of points that are solidly connected and identifies one physical object moving.

Now, why does nature do this? Why does a chameleon know not to move, and why does the Bacillus rossius Rossi, commonly known as a stick insect, behave in the same way? This is part of a profound process between information and degrees of freedom of energy. In essence, a physical object exists if it presents a frame of reference with respect to the observer. If the chameleon is stationary with respect to space or the background, you won't see it. But if the chameleon moves, you'll see it. This seems to be a physical principle of neuroscience related to how the human brain perceives physical objects.

Adding to the previous explanation, Einstein stated that mass is a form of energy, and we add that it has reduced degrees of freedom in the movement of particles. That is, it is an inertial form of energy that is somehow circumscribed and localizable. On the other hand, the photon is a form of non-localizable energy that is elusive despite its existence. The nature of space is elusive and constituted by very fast particles with a high degree of freedom, much like a gas or a quantum particle fluid, in which particles are too fast to be observed and constitute our CMBR background. Space could be considered as a superfluid medium, like a condensate spacetime (BEC), which may provide the hierarchy of motions and shear plane boundaries.

Therefore, what allows us to distinguish physical objects is, in a way, the common degree of freedom that allows us to identify them as a common frame of reference.

Feynman and Wheeler come into play here with two very similar positions, even though they appear very different at first glance. Feynman stated that, until today, no one has truly understood what energy is. Energy is somehow always adjectivized but not generally defined. There is electromagnetic energy, kinetic energy, thermal energy, and so on, but it seems very abstract to talk about energy in general. On the other hand, Wheeler reported an emblematic example of science. Imagine the greatest scientist in the world, an Einstein or a Majorana, who after decades of tireless work, managed to write and condense how the entire universe works into a small equation. At this point, Wheeler, with his disarming questions, tells us to look at that formula on that piece of paper, concentrate on it, and say, "Fly!" But it doesn't. Equations remain just equations. John Archibald Wheeler says that there is an even more important principle that allows

things to become real, and this principle is connected to how information channels through operational schemes and physical laws until it becomes real.

To expand on this, Wheeler believed that the fundamental building blocks of the universe are not particles or waves, but information. He proposed the concept of "it from bit," which suggests that the entire universe is made up of bits of information, and the physical reality we experience is the result of the processing and manipulation of this information.

In my work, I have taken this concept a step further by formulating the EIIT, which unifies energy, impulse, and information into a single framework. The EIIT allows us to understand physical phenomena in terms of information processing, giving us a new perspective on the nature of reality.

In conclusion, I believe that the concept of physical objects is deeply connected to the frame of reference and the degree of freedom they share with the observer. The nature of energy and the universe itself is elusive, and we need new mathematical frameworks like the EIIT to understand their complexities.

I would also like to add that the concept of a physical object is not only related to the observer's frame of reference but is also affected by the observer's measurement in quantum mechanics. The act of measurement changes the state of the observed system, and the observer becomes entangled with the system. This means that the observer and the observed system become one entity, and the concept of a physical object becomes ambiguous. The observer's measurement may reveal different properties of the observed system, depending on the measurement apparatus used, and the result may be different for different observers.

In light of this, the concept of a physical object becomes even more elusive, and we may need to revise our understanding of the nature of reality. The concept of a physical object may need to be replaced with the concept of an information object, which is a manifestation of the observer's measurement and the observer's entanglement with the system.

I would appreciate any feedback you may have on the preprint of the EIIT framework that I am developing, including potential errors or areas that may require further investigation. Your comments and insights would be very helpful to me as I continue to refine and improve the framework. Thank you for your time and consideration.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369328141_The_Energy-Impulse-Information_Tensor_A_Unified_Framework_for_Understanding_Physical_Phenomena

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhX6D3mc_mA

Hi Alessandro, I've read your extremely interesting EIIT paper a couple of times. It applies to a large number of things that interest me - the subjects of greatest interest would be Relativity, quantum mechanics, and quantum gravity. I don't think I'm the right person to give you comments and insights since I've never understood algebra or equations. I've got this weird brain in which those particular branches of mathematics make it very, very difficult to comprehend the physics of what's going on. However, I do know of a website where you could get appropriate comments and insights. It's called IPI (Information Physics Institute), and is at https://www.informationphysicsinstitute.org/home

I don't know if you've heard of it. If you haven't, and if you're interested, you can click on the link and then apply for membership by clicking on "Join IPI" in the screen's top-right.

Dear Ronny,

Thank you very much for your kind words and for taking the time to read my EIIT paper. I'm glad to hear that you found it interesting and that it relates to topics that interest you, such as Relativity, quantum mechanics, and quantum gravity.

I appreciate your honesty regarding your difficulty with mathematics, but thank you for the suggestion of the IPI website where I can get appropriate comments and insights. I haven't heard of it before, but I will definitely check it out and apply for membership.

Thank you again for your courtesy and helpfulness. It's greatly appreciated.

Take care, Alessandro

Dear Rodney,

I would like to express my sincerest apologies for mistakenly misspelling your name in my previous email.

Sincerely, Alessandro

No problem about misspelling my name, Alessandro. I'm glad I could help you with IPI. I hope they provide everything you want and need.

Rodney

No relation.