## Love

1. Love is a strategy that involves acting in the best possible way for life. Explanation: life includes everything (Tesla); strategy (mechanism theory, game theory); “my” best possible way is defined for me, not only by me; just because it is the best possible way for life does not mean that we should not kill animals or plants.

1.1. Love does not have a reason (meaning that you should always respond with love, but it has a reason in a sense that it is understood as some sort of “perfect” interaction (this “perfection” is there for some reason)). Explanation: it is just the most effective way of interaction; being together does not imply love- for the sake of simplicity, I will call it ‘a relationship'; it implies that:

1.1.1. Love is not selective. Explanation: if it does not have a reason, then we have to love all.

Posted in Mathematics | 1 Comment

## Learn from Bill Gates!

“It’s fine to celebrate success but it is more important to heed the lessons of failure,” Me: you can always be better, don’t focus on now, set your goals far away

“Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can’t lose,” Me: re-define success, you are a man of no success if you think like that; for it is a place where you win, which sets you outside your comfort zone, the one which requires a change from you

“We all need people who will give us feedback. That’s how we improve,”, Me: feedback is never bad, either you or the other person learns, learn from it

“We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. Don’t let yourself be lulled into inaction,”, Me: look far, in the best case assume that the change, which you represent, will live forever

“The best teacher is very interactive”, Me: as Galileo said, you cannot teach anyone, until he is ready for it (to understand it)

“I have been struck again and again by how important measurement is to improving the human condition,”, Me: now we will have the tools for dealing with it

“The general idea of the rich helping the poor, I think, is important,” Me: the rich helping the poor, or intelligence equalizer to exploit parameter space more effectively- are these equivalent? (even if not, how correlated? what causality?)

“Expectations are a form of first-class truth: If people believe it, it’s true,”, Me: again related to model selection; close to Neumann’s words about mathematics; in my blog the word “expectation” is replaced with “perceived”

“I think it makes sense to believe in God, but exactly what decision in your life you make differently because of it, I don’t know,” Me: ‘believe’ in a sense that we assume the existence of something much more developed than us; I also don’t know any such a decision that we would made differently

“A lot of the things that will really improve the world fortunately aren’t dependent on Washington doing something different,” Me: the improvement comes from the increase in intelligence, history is shaped by technological breakthroughs, e.g. printing, airplanes, computers, cars

“Understanding science and pushing the boundaries of science is what makes me immensely satisfied,” Me: you know my opinion about the “black box” from either the blog or the book

“Africa is on the rise,” Me: big equalizer comes from the Internet; if we manage to satisfy the fundamental needs, then talents will grow and exploit the power of the equalizer

“Drones overall will be more impactful than I think people recognize, in positive ways to help society”, Me: drones enable flight-based transportation of intelligence

“I was a kind of hyper-intense person in my twenties and very impatient,” Me: quality needs time, for it is in time where it grows; patience does not exist, see: Odes

“Personally, I’d like to see more of our leaders take a technocratic approach to solving our biggest problems”, Me: esp. now when we can exploit automated calculation (intelligence)

“There is no author whose books I look forward to more than Vaclav Smil,”

## Learn from John Forbes Nash!

“People are always selling the idea that people with mental illness are suffering. I think madness can be an escape. If things are not so good, you maybe want to imagine something better.”, Me: this is applicable esp. to people with great dreams, i.e. if you have a big dream, you have to exponentially grow to manage it (and you pay a price for it), but it may still not be enough, e.g. Euler did not manage to beat prime numbers (the same for Gauss), Newton could only start with a naive idea of infinitesimals, and we currently see a big battle “what is human?” ; see Cantor- he had to enter a psychiatric hospital, even though he was right all time (he kept on saying that infinities aren’t all the same)

“In madness, I thought I was the most important person in the world.”, Me: one needs to remember two things here: firstly, we can develop exponentially so that our intelligence exceeds the average intelligence by millions or billions of years; at the very same time, we are extremely limited, and from a larger perspective all look like small points; as for the quotation, importance shall not even be a feature, which we take into consideration in the decision making process; additionally, we should just give everyone a chance to give the best of him.

“I would not dare to say that there is a direct relation between mathematics and madness, but there is no doubt that great mathematicians suffer from maniacal characteristics, delirium and symptoms of schizophrenia.”, Me: if you grow exponentially, then you are far away from the people who surround you, i.e. you optimize a totally different set of features, then you are alone (even if surrounded by many), then you have almost no help or true understanding from the outside.

“Gradually I began to intellectually reject some of the delusionally influenced lines of thinking which had been characteristic of my orientation. This began, most recognizably, with the rejection of politically-oriented thinking as essentially a hopeless waste of intellectual effort.”, Me: yes, if it is you who must learn from as explicit values as possible, then fragile constructs, like politics, remain just a pragmatical implementation of thoughts of many to you; given that your thoughts are totally different, you don’t spend much time elaborating on those issues. This applies to people who must learn from the most explicit feedback. The word “must” is very important here.

“At the present time I seem to be thinking rationally again in the style that is characteristic of scientists. However this is not entirely a matter of joy as if someone returned from physical disability to good physical health. One aspect of this is that rationality of thought imposes a limit on a person’s concept of his relation to the cosmos.”, Me: when it comes to thinking and AI in general, we are right now experiencing a beautiful progress; terms, like “rationality”, will change forever.

## My songs (lyrics only)

songs (did not check the file for typos)

## Learn from John von Neumann!

Based on quotes from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann

“I think that it is a relatively good approximation to truth — which is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations — that mathematical ideas originate in empirics.”, Me: truly beautiful explanation of how mathematics is built; this is why we need to iteratively revise the foundations; this is why we need to allow more people in and bring in some experiment; the mathematics of the future will be for everyone, also for the robots

“Any one who considers arithmetical methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin.”, Me: true randomness cannot come from a deterministic process, we can use all (an infinite number of) primes to achieve the idea of “deterministic random”, which attracts my mind, as opposed to the explanation that there is no determinism (dr. Arkani-Hamed, on amplituhedron); just because we cannot see it from the inside of the box does not mean it does exist when a take a peek outside of it

“A large part of mathematics which becomes useful developed with absolutely no desire to be useful, and in a situation where nobody could possibly know in what area it would become useful; and there were no general indications that it ever would be so.”, Me: this happens, because we model things from imagination, which then sometimes turn out to be applicable to certain fields from the outside of mathematics; also, all things, which relate to numbers, are also related to any science, even though the relation may be disguised

“The sciences do not try to explain, they hardly even try to interpret, they mainly make models. By a model is meant a mathematical construct which, with the addition of certain verbal interpretations, describes observed phenomena. The justification of such a mathematical construct is solely and precisely that it is expected to work.”, Me: as stated earlier, any mathematics that we know is inspired by experiment, no matter how tough to see that is

“It is exceptional that one should be able to acquire the understanding of a process without having previously acquired a deep familiarity with running it, with using it, before one has assimilated it in an instinctive and empirical way… Thus any discussion of the nature of intellectual effort in any field is difficult, unless it presupposes an easy, routine familiarity with that field. In mathematics this limitation becomes very severe.”, Me: objects, which we use in mathematics, may not come from our direct experience, and, nevertheless, we feel compelled up to use them; everything is low level in mathematics (mathematics is lowest level physics) and thus our ability to experiment with them is limited; thus, the limitation in question becomes severe; indeed, mathematics is an experimental science; even if we make a proposition of a feature like a complex number (from complex numbers), we either feel it describes well our experience (because we want to have it as a feature)

“When we talk mathematics, we may be discussing a secondary language built on the primary language of the nervous system.”, Me: we want to have it like that, for it is mathematics a low-level part of physics; we need to remember that our model selection in mathematics (numbers, operations) very strongly defines our science- a beautiful example here would be the connection of lim and exponentiation over the integers resulting in e; how could we know in first place that it was limited?

“You should call it entropy, for two reasons. In the first place your uncertainty function has been used in statistical mechanics under that name, so it already has a name. In the second place, and more important, no one really knows what entropy really is, so in a debate you will always have the advantage.”, Me: the dissipation of state is for a reason and is not a feature, which the universe itself knows

“Young man, in mathematics you don’t understand things. You just get used to them.”, Me: took me years to understand it; true; we have a set of experimental features to investigate; mathematics is going to become more like a sculpture, where a sculpturer iteratively improves his vision, based on experiment; mathematics has a big help now – we can see nanostructures better now, we learn to talk to quants

“You don’t have to be responsible for the world that you’re in.” (von Neumann to Feynman) , Me: you don’t, because you are part of it, and hence cannot embrace it, i.e. you are not the owner; but, for the life to be beautiful, i want to feel responsible and therefore believe that we all have a part of the infinity that goes beyond the observable in the world (is from outside of it)

“The calculus was the first achievement of modern mathematics and it is difficult to overestimate its importance. I think it defines more unequivocally than anything else the inception of modern mathematics; and the system of mathematical analysis, which is its logical development, still constitutes the greatest technical advance in exact thinking.”, Me: agreed; in addition, features such as the infinitesimal, seem now to represent a straight-forward (naive) approach

“If one has really technically penetrated a subject, things that previously seemed in complete contrast, might be purely mathematical transformations of each other.”, Me: boils down to gaining a deeper understanding of things

“If people do not believe that mathematics is simple, it is only because they do not realize how complicated life is.”, Me: nothing to add, agreed

## My time and space experiments – 1

1. Particle-wave behavior: Does there exist a model which incorporates both? Can we use prime numbers for it (frequency-like scheme and interger-based minimal integer value)

The answer is: quantum field theory.

2. Light sources: two light sources at both ends of a spring are emitted in opposite directions. What is the speed at which the spring extends?

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/127248/experiment-with-spring-and-two-light-sources-emitting-light-in-opposite-directio

3. Would full determinism mean that God cannot exist, since would exist no such object which would not be able to do whatever he wants?

http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/14722/determinism-vs-the-existence-of-god

4. Does there exist a mathematical formalism (model) in particle physics that assumes that the existence of an infinite number of different, yet smallest particles (building blocks)?

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/127283/mathematical-model-that-allows-the-existence-of-an-infinite-number-of-smallest

5. Does the uncertainty principle imply the non-deterministic universe, or just the fact that our model based on observation can be at most non-deterministic? (this question has already been asked, below a good link)

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/24068/isnt-the-uncertainty-principle-just-non-fundamental-limitations-in-our-current

For a fixed $n \in N$, there exists at least one prime among the integers of the form $2^{k}n+2^k-1$ for an arbitrary $k \in N$.