[General] Emergent philosophy for model development

[Hodge John]

This is a continuation of Richard's comments on this forum's discussed models from a few weeks ago. 
Emergence philosophy was derived from observations of biology, life, and societies. Science has worked by reductionism arguments. Within each level of organization of the universe such as atoms there is a more elementary level such as electrons and nuclei. The same can be said of the cosmological scale, classical scale, and the quantum scale. The relation of the components (electrons, etc.) of a level and the emergent level entity (atoms) follows the philosophical idea and rules of ``emergence'' philosophy. An emergent property is one that is not a property of a component level and is a property of the emergent level. 
The definition and characteristics of emergence vary. The following is the view of the Scalar Theory of Everything (STOE) model. Emergent components and their simple rules of behavior form more complex entities and behaviors. The relation between the components and the emerged entities is causal. Therefore, there is a Theory of Everything involving causal relations from the very small to the very large. 
Epistomatically an emergence condition is present when predictions of experiments fail or when the methods applied to one scale fail to apply at the reduced size scale. That is, when reductionism fails. Mathematically at a level, this looks like a ``probably'' exercise of the next lower level because the complexity of the interactions is very high relative to the understanding and models. Generic atomism models failure is attributed to lack of knowledge or the predictions required are too complex. However, a change in the model of the components, the properties of the components, and the causes of the emergent entities can develop simpler rules and remove the necessity of a probability treatment. 
Ontologically an emergent condition is present when features of the universe are not reducibly to the models of fundamental entities. The models suggested are not looking for the components in the emergent scale universe. For example, the STOE suggests hods and their properties are the emergent components of photons and the photon's properties are the result of the emergence. The emergent entity: (1) is composed of the components, (2) is novel (much different than the component and composed of many of the components), (3) is a single, autonomous entity from which complexity occurs, (4) involves some element of holism, and (5) follows simple rules from which the emergent entity converges to follow new rules. 
Convergence requires the entities have an attraction (addition) and repulsion (subtraction) system and have random (within our measurement ability) wandering ability. Convergence requires some form of selection or death of those structures that are not stable for the system to evolve. Being stable requires a form of more efficient packing. That is, one of the rules is a fractal (scale free and self similar) universe because the fractal systems solve the packing problem. The local universe of galaxies is evolving toward denser packing. However, the universe of many local regions and the emergence requirement for convergence suggests some locals must be in an ``attraction'' (adding components) mode and other locals must be in a repulsion (removing components) mode. Stability also requires that a negative feedback situation exists among the various entities and processes. Otherwise the new entities will decay over time. Examples include covalent bonding in chemistry and entanglement in QM. 
This produces the nearly constant universe temperature through a feedback relationship. Gravity is an attraction emergent effect. The repulsive emergent effects are called ``dark energy'' and ``dark matter''. The ``dark matter'' effect is mislabeled in standard cosmology. Therefore, the three effects are aspects of one entity -- the plenum (space of General relativity, gravitational aether).
We see increasing organization in our galaxy as the emergence philosophy suggests. This seems contrary to the second law of thermodynamics. The second law of thermodynamics applies to a closed system. Therefore, the universe must be an open system not the closed system of the Big Bang model. 
The Scalar Theory of Everything (STOE) model \citep{hodg15b} posits the Fractal (self--similarity) Principle that all size scales have similar processes (math). Therefore, the very small scale has analogies found in our classical scale and not the bizarre features of quantum mechanics. 
A concept of strong and weak emergence is occasionally invoked. The distinction is whether a computer simulation can model the behavior of the components to produce an observed effect of an emergent entity. The STOE rejects this distinction claiming that all entities can be modeled by the behavior of their components. The apparent complexity of the entities seems a barrier to the limited computer accuracy and processing. However, the STOE posits a fractal universe that implies models of our Newtonian scale can be used as an analogy. The STOE also posits the universe is composed of negative feedback loops at all scales. For example, the STOE model of the behavior of a photon in Young's experiment and Hodge's experiment involves over 6,000 calculating steps for each photon and the calculations are done with four significant figure constants. The photons are kept on course by several feedback loops. The 3-body problem may also be simulated using feedback loops rather than requiring extreme accuracy. The ``fine tuning'' of some parameter is also the result of a negative feedback relationship and convergence. 
Reductionism and emergence has been suggested to yield different models because reductionism holds the whole entity is a sum of the parts. Emergence holds the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. If reductionism fails, it fails because the component parts are modeled incorrectly. At a given level of organization the entities and their characteristics in a given level of organization are the result of emergence and, therefore, are inappropriate to model the reduced level. Hence, the searching for components should be for different properties that can form the emerged entities. Richard's comments indicate the suggested models in this forum fail these criteria. 
If emergence is a fundamental characteristic of our universe, the elementary particles must be composed of different constituents that form the elementary particle structure when combined. The characteristics of the elementary particles must be different than the basic particles. That is, the characteristics of the elementary particles are different than the constituents and do not describe the constituents. 
The cause of electromagnetism has posed a mystery. Several attempts have been made to link + and - charge to matter or particles. Magnetism has been modeled as resulting from the movement of charges. Therefore, particles with a magnetic moment have been modeled as rotating charges on particles. These type models seem unworkable in the STOE view of only two constituents of the universe. One is a discrete hod component of two dimensions. The other is the continuous plenum component that transmits waves. The hods induce waves in the plenum and the plenum divergence directs the hods. How can identical hods have a + and a - charge? 
Observation showed the photon was polarized in a magnetic field. The STOE postulates the emerged particle, the photon, is a column of hods. The number of hods in a photon determines its energy. 
The property of the component hods is that it emits waves of plenum. The emerged property of the photon is that the waves interfere (add and subtract) to yield diffraction and interference effects. Young's experiment and Hodge's experiment \cite{hodg15a,hodg16b} supported the STOE model and rejected all other models of light. 
The quantum mechanics model (QM) of the Stern-Gerlach experiment is that the spatial orientation of angular momentum is quantized. Photons were posited to have an integer (one) angular momentum. Fermions (electrons) have half integer angular momentum. A magnetic field exerts a torque on the magnetic dipole of elementary particles. This presumes each particle has only one magnetic North-South axis (NS). The magnetic moment vector will precess about the direction of the magnetic field. The non--uniformity of a magnetic field induces a sideways force on the fermions. However, the mass of each particle is included in the derivation to arrive at the ``spin'' calculation. Thus, the differing masses of the fermions should yield a different ``spin''. The calculation also includes an assumption the charge is distributed in the particle that produces the NS axis of the particle. But the neutron (no charge) has a ``spin''.
The STOE suggests a classical explanation of the spin observations. STOE emergent theory suggests the photons are a column of hods, the neutrinos are an assembly of photons aligned next to each other, the electrons are an assembly of neutrinos, the quarks are assemblies of electrons, etc.
The photon becomes polarized when passing through a magnetic field. Therefore, the emerged quality of the photon's response to a magnetic fields suggests the photon is acting like a bar magnet. Therefore, the hod component of the emerged photon was posited to be a magnet with a north pole (N) on one side and a south pole (S) on the other. 
The neutrinos and, therefore, electrons having two spin axes in a heterogeneous magnetic field that cannot be measured simultaneously can also cause the Stern-Gerlach experiment observations. The orientation of the electron as it progress through an inhomogeneous magnetic field is determined by one of two NS axes. The other fermions also have two axes that accounts for the same spin number for all fermions. The troublesome angular momentum model is unnecessary. 
The digitization of ``spin'' is also explained by classical arguments that the magnetic poles of the assembly of hods cause the unique directions. That is ``space quantization'' is not necessary. 
Conscience may be another emergent property from the neuron components. The idea of the ``grandmother'' neuron has been disproved. The growth (evolution) functioning of the neural nets and bundles may provide the mechanism of consciousness. The simple rules need to be identified. 
If emergence is a rule of the universe, then the STOE satisfies this rule.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20160731/90a46716/attachment.htm>