Write4U's stream of consciousness

[DaveC426913]

That is pure drivel. Meaningless word salad.

A differential equation isn't "causal" to anything.
"Dynamical action" is a term you just made up.
"balance" is undefined by you in this context and hopelessly vague.
"equity" is a completely irrelevant attempt to distract.

Don't forget "...an attempt to find balance and equity"

The universe does not "attempt to find" anything. Unless he's advocating some sort of sentience. Oh wait. Write4U belives in a "quasi-intelligent universe".

 

[James R]

Write4U:

TY..at least it is not labeled "off-topic" and accumulating gratuitous "demerits".

I am being kind to you. Can't you see that? None of the warnings you have received have been gratuitous. The reasons you have received warnings have been clearly given to you and have also been posted for other readers to see.

If I reply that what you just wrote in reply to my post is pure drivel and meaningless word salad, where does that lead us?

It leads you into further error and ignorance. It leads me to conclude that you're appalling bad at taking in information and understanding it.

Did you notice that I explained to you why what you wrote was drivel and meaningless word salad? Was I wrong about anything?

I have told you before that any "drivel" you do not understand is open to challenge and explanation...

I challenged it. You have not responded to the substance of my challenge. Are you going to? Or are you going to accept that I was correct? Or will you try to ignore it?

... but you leave no room for DISCUSSION on the merits, because of semantics.

I know that, with you, it has become a matter of "post any old thing, as long as the conversation continues".

But please, by all means, tell me about the merits of what you posted. Start with the merits of this, please: "A differential equation is causal to dynamical action in an attempt to find balance and equity."

Go through my objections, one by one, and tell me where I went wrong and why.

You cannot see your contradiction in that question?
I have not only cited it, I quoted it. Would that suggest I read it?

Demonstrating that you understood it would suggest that you read it. Reading is not the same as having a brief skim through something, or glancing through it for key words before cutting-and-pasting, with fingers crossed that it might be relevant.

Citing it merely tells me that you can cut and post a link that came up in a google search.
Quoting it merely tells me that you can cut and paste random paragraphs from a web page.

 

[Write4U]

The universe does not "attempt to find" anything. Unless he's advocating some sort of sentience.

Principle of minimum energy
The principle of minimum energy is essentially a restatement of the second law of thermodynamics. It states that for a closed system, with constant external parameters and entropy, the internal energy will decrease and approach a minimum value at equilibrium. External parameters generally means the volume, but may include other parameters which are specified externally, such as a constant magnetic field or a gravitational geometry.. Wikipedia

Equilibrium Solutions
Equilibrium point definition

When talking about physical systems we use the term equilibrium to describe a system that doesn't change, that is in balance. We translate this same concept to mathematics when talking about the behavior of functions as you graph them and how you can observe its dependent value to stay balanced through different values of the independent variable.

https://www.studypug.com/differential-equations-help/equilibrium-solutions#

Balance in Physics: In physics, balance refers to the state of an object or system when it is not accelerating. This means that the net force acting on the object or system is zero, and there is no change in its velocity. Objects can be in static balance (not moving) or dynamic balance (moving at a constant velocity).Dec 12, 2023

Equilibrium in Physics: Unveiling the Laws of Balance

1. Introduction to Equilibrium in Physics

Equilibrium in Physics is a fundamental concept that applies to a wide range of objects and systems, from the smallest particles to the largest structures in the universe. It is the state of balance in which the net force acting on an object or system is zero. That is, the forces acting on the object are equal and opposite, canceling each other out. Equilibrium is a crucial concept in physics because it allows us to understand how objects behave under the influence of external forces, and how they respond to changes in their environment.

https://fastercapital.com/content/Equilibrium-in-Physics--Unveiling-the-Laws-of-Balance.html#

Will the universe end in complete equilibrium?

The present epoch of our cosmos features vast energy and heat differences, but the iron laws of thermodynamics dictate that eventually those differences will vanish. The universe—what's left of it—will reach thermal equilibrium, with no significant heat differences remaining. Mar 7, 2023

Oh wait. Write4U believes in a "quasi-intelligent universe".

This is how threads get hijacked and I get blamed.
You ask the question and I respond . Then I get accused of being off topic.
But I shall respond to statement as posed.

Yes, the Universe actsin a quasi-intelligent manner, based on the concepts of "necessity and sufficiency".

Necessity and sufficiency
Terms to describe a self-relational conditional relationship between two statements

In logic and mathematics, necessity and sufficiency are terms used to describe a conditional or implicational relationship between two statements. For example, in the conditional statement: "If P then Q", Q is necessary for P, because the truth of Q is guaranteed by the truth of P. Similarly, P is sufficient for Q, because P being true always implies that Q is true, but P not being true does not always imply that Q is not true.[2]..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency

And IMO, all this related to the emergence of increasingly intelligent behavior, via evolutionary processes.[/QUOTE]

 

[James R]

Write4U:

You have now proceeded to hijack your original thread hijack.

I have moved all of the off-topic material from the thread about ChatGPT into this one.

Please choose a topic for this thread. If you can suggest a suitable topic title, I will consider changing the thread title. But, at this stage, there's no consistent theme that I can discern from your posts, other than them being full of meaningless word salad.

 

[James R]

Write4U:

You wrote: "A differential equation is causal to dynamical action in an attempt to find balance and equity."
Dave C wrote: "The universe does not 'attempt to find' anything."

Your latest post (#16) appears to be a weak attempt to argue that the universe attempts to find "balance". I guess that, following DaveC's comment, you googled "balance in physics" or similar and then went off on one of your usual random cut-and-paste sprees, without actually understanding anything you copied.

Is that a fair summary of what you were trying to do in post #16?

Can you demonstrate that you have any understanding at all of the "principle of minimum energy" that you quoted, for instance? Does that principle apply generally, in your opinion, or is it a special case? Is it, in your opinion, an example of the universe attempting to find "balance"?

More generally, is the universe an intelligent actor that tries to do things, in your opinion? Is the universe God?

You also quoted some stuff about two different types of equilibrium. Do you consider those examples of the universe trying to find balance?

Finally, you said "Yes, the Universe acts in a quasi-intelligent manner, based on the concepts of 'necessity and sufficiency'."

Is it your claim that the universe (i.e. the whole thing) acts with an individual purpose, possibly to find "balance"?
Is it your claim that "balance" is necessary and/or sufficient?
What is it necessary or sufficient for?

You have also repeated your claim that the universe acts in a quasi-intelligent manner. What does that mean? Does the entire universe, as a whole, act in such a manner, or is it only certain parts of the entire universe that act quasi-intelligently?

Also, last time you brought up this idea, you failed to explain what you meant by "quasi-intelligent". What's the difference between intelligence and quasi-intelligence?

Is the universe intelligent, or quasi-intelligent? Does that apply to the universe as a whole, or only to parts of the universe?

I look forward to your detailed response.

 

[Write4U]

Is that a fair summary of what you were trying to do in post #16?

No, that is not a fair summation of my post #16

Is it your claim that the universe (i.e. the whole thing) acts with an individual purpose, possibly to find "balance"?

No, I have never made that claim.

You have also repeated your claim that the universe acts in a quasi-intelligent manner. What does that mean? Does the entire universe, as a whole, act in such a manner, or is it only certain parts of the entire universe that act quasi-intelligently?

No, that is your position, i.e. "the universe has some mathematical properties" as opposed to Tegmark's "the universe has only mathematical properties".
And, IMO, therein lies the crux.

Assuming that the universe functions mathematically (as originally proposed by some very deep thinkers) and humans are a product of universal machinations, then universal quasi-intelligent (mathematical) processes have produced human intelligence and there is no intrinsic difference between physiological and biological systems

quasi-intelligent = seemingly able to self-organize repeating complex patterns.. i.e. levels of intelligent functions

quasi-
combining form
: in some sense or degree

Etymology
from Latin quasi "as if"

intelligent
Sense: clever
Synonyms: smart (informal), clever , bright , astute, quick witted, sharp, quick, knowledgeable, savvy(informal),
shrewd, wise, acute, brainy(informal), resourceful, perspicacious, sagacious, judicious, smart as a whip(informal)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quasi

quasi-intelligent (QI)
it is a simple compound word that clearly shows "common denominators" between levels of biological Human Intelligence and Artificial Quasi-Intelligence, such as logical mathematics. How does a slime-mold solve a maze? It unwittingly uses "subtraction" to solve not only a maze but also the shortest distance when there are several solutions to solve the maze, but the one which is the most efficient!

Let me illustrate:A slime-mold was challenged with a map of the Tokyo railroad system where major towns were used as "food" (bunch of oats). It took the slime-mold a few days to copy the Tokyo railway system, what took human engineers years of planning.

IMO, that makes it a biological quasi-intelligent single celled organism! It doesn't even have a neural system, but it is the prototype of evolving consciousness from some fundamental ordering systems like natural selection , later leading to the evolution of conscious intelligent sensory data processing in several earth species on land, in the sea and in the air, and that includes us.

Human intelligence is a product of a long evolution and natural selection of functional survival abilities.
Now observe the almost unbelievable variety of organisms that have emerged and evolved from what could not have been but a few places of origin.
But the variety of extant species and variations and extinct species that have ever existed but are barely discovered, ranging from the first extremophiles to everything that followed is almost unimaginable.

To me this is all a probabilistic result of an abstract logical ordering system based on the interaction of sufficient resources (minerals), sufficient surface area for chemical interaction in a dynamic environment, and sufficient time and with some essential mathematical rules that are permissive or restrictive functions

I just like the mathematical model over all other contenders. It makes sense in context of an evolved human intelligence from an original chaotic inflationary epoch, but rich in energy and potential relational quantum values.

 

[exchemist]

No, that is not a fair summation of my post #16
No, I have never made that claim.

No, that is your position, i.e. "the universe has some mathematical properties" as opposed to Tegmark's "the universe has only mathematical properties".
And, IMO, therein lies the crux.

Assuming that the universe functions mathematically (as originally proposed by some very deep thinkers) and humans are a product of universal machinations, then universal quasi-intelligent (mathematical) processes have produced human intelligence and there is no intrinsic difference between physiological and biological systems

quasi-intelligent = seemingly able to self-organize repeating complex patterns.. i.e. levels of intelligent functions

quasi-
combining form
: in some sense or degree

Etymology
from Latin quasi "as if"

intelligent
Sense: clever
Synonyms: smart (informal), clever , bright , astute, quick witted, sharp, quick, knowledgeable, savvy(informal),
shrewd, wise, acute, brainy(informal), resourceful, perspicacious, sagacious, judicious, smart as a whip(informal)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quasi

quasi-intelligent (QI)
it is a simple compound word that clearly shows "common denominators" between levels of biological Human Intelligence and Artificial Quasi-Intelligence, such as logical mathematics. How does a slime-mold solve a maze? It unwittingly uses "subtraction" to solve not only a maze but also the shortest distance when there are several solutions to solve the maze, but the one which is the most efficient!

Let me illustrate:A slime-mold was challenged with a map of the Tokyo railroad system where major towns were used as "food" (bunch of oats). It took the slime-mold a few days to copy the Tokyo railway system, what took human engineers years of planning.

IMO, that makes it a biological quasi-intelligent single celled organism! It doesn't even have a neural system, but it is the prototype of evolving consciousness from some fundamental ordering systems like natural selection , later leading to the evolution of conscious intelligent sensory data processing in several earth species on land, in the sea and in the air, and that includes us.

Human intelligence is a product of a long evolution and natural selection of functional survival abilities.
Now observe the almost unbelievable variety of organisms that have emerged and evolved from what could not have been but a few places of origin.
But the variety of extant species and variations and extinct species that have ever existed but are barely discovered, ranging from the first extremophiles to everything that followed is almost unimaginable.

To me this is all a probabilistic result of an abstract logical ordering system based on the interaction of sufficient resources (minerals), sufficient surface area for chemical interaction in a dynamic environment, and sufficient time and with some essential mathematical rules that are permissive or restrictive functions

I just like the mathematical model over all other contenders. It makes sense in context of an evolved human intelligence from an original chaotic inflationary epoch, but rich in energy and potential relational quantum values.

Ah yes, those potential relational quantum values. I bet they are self-referential too.

Where are Dave and his wheel when you need them?

 

[Pinball1970]

Ah yes, those potential relational quantum values. I bet they are self-referential too.

Where are Dave and his wheel when you need them?

It is trolling, simply put and very tiresome. I could start a thread on Uracil isolated in samples brought back from one of the Jaxa projects and Write4u would insert a microtubule into the thread.

It dilutes, pollutes, stagnates and retards intelligent discussion of anything he is involved in.

EDIT: At least James is timing him out of the forum now and taking him out of threads.

 

[Write4U]

Ah yes, those potential relational quantum values. I bet they are self-referential too.

If they are "relational" then they are self-referential. no?

 

[Write4U]

It is trolling, simply put and very tiresome.

This is what you are doing right now.

I could start a thread on Uracil isolated in samples brought back from one of the Jaxa projects and Write4u would insert a microtubule into the thread.

No, that is a pure category error. You are talking nonsense. Hijacking my thread already?

But if the organism is a Eukaryote, then the presence and utility of microtubules certainly apply.
Microtubules are a "common denominator" of ALL Eukaryotic life on earth and in a simpler filament form in Prokaryotic life.
I believe the importance of that evolutionary fact has been completely lost in the general melee.

EDIT: At least James is timing him out of the forum now and taking him out of threads.

Yes, and given me some latitude in the threads I do post in. Think of that what you will. I love it.

And you no longer have to fear my besmirching your pristine scientific discourse in the pseudoscience subforum....

 

[exchemist]

If they are "relational" then they are self-referential. no?

Your hovercraft is full of eels.

 

[Write4U]

Write4U:↑ The processing of self-referential "differential equations"

.
It seems that was your "answer" to the question I asked you: "how does human thinking work, in your opinion?"

That is what I am attempting to describe. No one has the full answer to that yet.

And this is you in post #26:

↑ I did not use the term self-reference in context of mathematics.

In what context are differential equations not mathematics?

I think the problem with your question is self-evident!

 

[Write4U]

Your hovercraft is full of eels.

If exclamation makes sense to you then you are in serious trouble.
But you are hijacking my thread! Purposely!!!

 

[James R]

I think the problem with your question is self-evident!

It isn't.

You wrote the phrase "self-referential 'differential equations'".

Then you claimed that you weren't using the term 'self-referential" in a "context of mathematics".

As far as I can tell, the subject of differential equations implies a "context of mathematics". There's no such thing as a non-mathematical differential equation.

I think the problem with your assertion/excuse is evident.

 

[James R]

No, that is your position, i.e. "the universe has some mathematical properties" as opposed to Tegmark's "the universe has only mathematical properties".
And, IMO, therein lies the crux.

What do you believe? That the universe has some mathematical properties, or that it has only mathematical properties?

Assuming that the universe functions mathematically (as originally proposed by some very deep thinkers) and humans are a product of universal machinations, then universal quasi-intelligent (mathematical) processes have produced human intelligence and there is no intrinsic difference between physiological and biological systems

When you say "quasi-intelligent", is that merely a synonym for "mathematical"?

quasi-intelligent = seemingly able to self-organize repeating complex patterns.. i.e. levels of intelligent functions

Seemingly?

So you're saying that the universe seems to be able to self-organise repeating complex patterns, but that it might not actually do so? Hence, "quasi-intelligent" rather than just "intelligent"?

it is a simple compound word that clearly shows "common denominators" between levels of biological Human Intelligence and Artificial Quasi-Intelligence, such as logical mathematics.

Nothing in the definitions of "quasi-" or "intelligent" that you have quoted imply any such thing.

How does a slime-mold solve a maze? It unwittingly uses "subtraction" to solve not only a maze but also the shortest distance when there are several solutions to solve the maze, but the one which is the most efficient!

You've lost me. What do you think the slime mold thing demonstrates, exactly? Something about the mathematical universe?

IMO, that makes it a biological quasi-intelligent single celled organism!

By which you mean it seems like it might be intelligent, but you're not sure that it is?

It doesn't even have a neural system, but it is the prototype of evolving consciousness...

How does the slime mold thing demonstrate consciousness?

Human intelligence is a product of a long evolution and natural selection of functional survival abilities.
Now observe the almost unbelievable variety of organisms that have emerged and evolved from what could not have been but a few places of origin.
But the variety of extant species and variations and extinct species that have ever existed but are barely discovered, ranging from the first extremophiles to everything that followed is almost unimaginable.

I don't see how any of that links to anything else you said.

To me this is all a probabilistic result of an abstract logical ordering system based on the interaction of sufficient resources (minerals), sufficient surface area for chemical interaction in a dynamic environment, and sufficient time and with some essential mathematical rules that are permissive or restrictive functions

Okay. So what?

I just like the mathematical model over all other contenders.

What other contenders? Contenders for what?

It makes sense in context of an evolved human intelligence from an original chaotic inflationary epoch, but rich in energy and potential relational quantum values.

What makes sense?

You're aware that "potential relational quantum values" doesn't actually mean anything, aren't you?

 

[Pinball1970]

No, that is a pure category error. You are talking nonsense. Hijacking my thread already?

Not any more
I'll leave you to it.

 

[origin]

If exclamation makes sense to you then you are in serious trouble.

I guess you needs it explained to you. "Your hovercraft is full of eels" is a meaningless reply (from Monty Python) that is meant to highlight that your post is meaningless or so stupid that it does not deserve a reasonable response.

But you are hijacking my thread! Purposely!!!

It is not a hijack. Your posts are silly flights of fancy that are full of made up and meaningless terms, so it would seem that exchemist's post was nonsense just like your posts.

 

[Write4U]

As far as I can tell, the subject of differential equations implies a "context of mathematics". There's not such thing as a non-mathematical differential equation.

Self-referential is an adjective that can be used for non-mathematical purposes.

What is an example of self-referential?

In the context of language, self-reference is used to denote a statement that refers to itself or its own referent. The most famous example of a self-referential sentence is the liar sentence: “This sentence is not true.” Self-reference is often used in a broader context as well.Jul 15, 2008

https://plato.stanford.edu/Entries/self-reference/#

A differential equation is a mathematical object and can only be used for mathematical purposes.

Newton listed three kinds of differential equations:

In all these cases, y is an unknown function of x (or of x1 and x2), and f is a given function.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_equation

 

[Write4U]

What do you believe? That the universe has some mathematical properties, or that it has only mathematical properties?

I believe Tegmark makes a convincing argument.
Everything has a value. All values are mathematical objects. Doesn't sound complicated to me.

I am also not aware of a functional alternative other than magic. Can you offer a non-mathematical model of the Universe?

When you say "quasi-intelligent", is that merely a synonym for "mathematical"?

Exactly! IMO, mathematics is a non-sentient quasi-intelligent function

Does mathematics exist before humans?
MATHEMATICS: BOTH AN INVENTION AND DISCOVERY

The practical applicability of mathematics always existed in-universe far before humans did. So, mathematics is a discovered entity, only the theoretical explanation of the phenomenon occurring in the cosmos is an invented aspect of mathematics by human intelligence to have a logical idea of the world. Aug 25, 2021

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mathematics-both-invention-discovery-evan-martis

 

[Write4U]

Seemingly?

That's one of the definitions. Seems clear enough to me.

So you're saying that the universe seems to be able to self-organise repeating complex patterns, but that it might not actually do so? Hence, "quasi-intelligent" rather than just "intelligent"?

No, the universe has been observed to self-organize, it just doesn't do this consciously.

The self-organizing fractal theory as a universal discovery method: the phenomenon of life

It is postulated that the energy/matter flowing through and comprising the Universe evolves as a multiscale, self-similar structure-process, i.e., as a self-organizing fractal.Mar 29, 2011

Abstract

A universal discovery method potentially applicable to all disciplines studying organizational phenomena has been developed. This method takes advantage of a new form of global symmetry, namely, scale-invariance of self-organizational dynamics of energy/matter at all levels of organizational hierarchy, from elementary particles through cells and organisms to the Universe as a whole. The method is based on an alternative conceptualization of physical reality postulating that the energy/matter comprising the Universe is far from equilibrium, that it exists as a flow, and that it develops via self-organization in accordance with the empirical laws of nonequilibrium thermodynamics. It is postulated that the energy/matter flowing through and comprising the Universe evolves as a multiscale, self-similar structure-process, i.e., as a self-organizing fractal.

This means that certain organizational structures and processes are scale-invariant and are reproduced at all levels of the organizational hierarchy. Being a form of symmetry, scale-invariance naturally lends itself to a new discovery method that allows for the deduction of missing information by comparing scale-invariant organizational patterns across different levels of the organizational hierarchy.

An application of the new discovery method to life sciences reveals that moving electrons represent a keystone physical force (flux) that powers, animates, informs, and binds all living structures-processes into a planetary-wide, multiscale system of electron flow/circulation, and that all living organisms and their larger-scale organizations emerge to function as electron transport networks that are supported by and, at the same time, support the flow of electrons down the Earth's redox gradient maintained along the core-mantle-crust-ocean-atmosphere axis of the planet.

The presented findings lead to a radically new perspective on the nature and origin of life, suggesting that living matter is an organizational state/phase of nonliving matter and a natural consequence of the evolution and self-organization of nonliving matter.

more ...
https://tbiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1742-4682-8-4#

Nothing in the definitions of "quasi-" or "intelligent" that you have quoted imply any such thing.

OK. let me draw a comparison.
Religion proposes a conscious and motivated Intelligent Designer. "And God saw that it was good". I am atheist so I reject that model.

Instead, a mathematical universe (as proposed by Tegmark) is a self-organizing object, utilizing inherent relational values and mathematical functions to achieve the same results, without motivated purpose or intent. It acts as if it is intelligent, but it is not self-aware.
The stage where AI is currently?

Sometimes a natural action is not "good" but "destructive" (chaotic) , such as a super-nova.

You've lost me. What do you think the slime mold thing demonstrates, exactly? [ Something about the mathematical universe?
By which you mean it seems like it might be intelligent, but you're not sure that it is?

It uses a mathematical function (subtraction) to explore and solve a maze. It doesn't know that it does but it factually does do the subtraction and thereby solves the problem.

How does the slime mold thing demonstrate consciousness?

It can learn to anticipate timed intervals, and it responds defensively to stress. It has preferred foods (oats) but when it is hungry it will tolerate hardship to reach its goal.

No brain, just cytoplasm and cytoskeleton doing all the data processing (thinking). Quasi-intelligent data processing.

Stress signaling in acellular slime moulds and its detection by conspecifics
ABSTRACT

Unicellular organisms live in unpredictable environments. Therefore, they need to continuously assess environmental conditions and respond appropriately to survive and thrive. When subjected to rapid changes in their environment or to cellular damages, unicellular organisms such as bacteria exhibit strong physiological reactions called stress responses that can be sensed by conspecifics. The ability to detect and use stress-related cues released by conspecifics to acquire information about the environment constitutes an adaptive survival response by prompting the organism to avoid potential dangers.

Here, we investigate stress signalling and its detection by conspecifics in a unicellular organism, Physarum polycephalum. Slime moulds were subjected to either biotic (i.e. nutritional) or abiotic (i.e. chemical and light) stressors or left undisturbed while they were exploring a homogeneous environment. Then, we observed the responses of slime moulds facing a choice between cues released by stressed clone mates and cues released by undisturbed ones. We found that slime moulds actively avoided environments previously explored by stressed clone mates.

These results suggest that slime moulds, like bacteria or social amoeba, exhibit physiological responses to biotic and abiotic stresses that can be sensed by conspecifics. Our results establish slime moulds as a promising new model to investigate the use of social information in unicellular organisms.

Alternatively, stressed slime molds could release specific chemical substances depending on the type of stressors. In the case of chemical stress, the chemical substance used to stress slime molds could itself be the cue used by focal slime molds to avoid potential danger

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7331006/#

I don't see how any of that links to anything else you said.

Is it beginning to make sense?

What other contenders? Contenders for what?

Models of the Universe and its functions.

What makes sense?

The proposition that all natural processes in the Universe obey mathematical rules. Mathematically based laws of behavior.
We just have not yet discovered all the pertinent mathematics for all the observed phenomena.

You're aware that "potential relational quantum values" doesn't actually mean anything, aren't you?

Yes, it does mean a loose interpretation of Bohm's "Implicate order".

Implicate and explicate order
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Implicate order and explicate order are ontological concepts for quantum theory coined by theoretical physicist David Bohm during the early 1980s. They are used to describe two different frameworks for understanding the same phenomenon or aspect of reality. In particular, the concepts were developed in order to explain the bizarre behaviors of subatomic particles which quantum physics describes and predicts with elegant precision but struggles to explain.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicate_and_explicate_order#[/quote]