<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>This is from a dialog Pavel Kurakin and I are having behind the
scenes. I wanted to see what you all thought of it. Howard</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You know that I'm a quantum skeptic. I believe that our math is
primitive. The best math we've been able to conceive to get a handle on
quantum particles is probabilistic. Which means it's cloudy. It's
filled with multiple choices. But that's the problem of our math, not of
the cosmos. With more precise math I think we could make more precise
predictions.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>And with far more flexible math, we could model large-scale things like
bio-molecules, big ones, genomes, proteins and their interactions. With a
really robust and mature math we could model thought and brains. But that
math is many centuries and many perceptual breakthroughs away.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As mathematicians, we are still in the early stone age.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But what I've said above has a kink I've hidden from view. It implies
that there's a math that would model the cosmos in a totally deterministic
way. And life is not deterministic. We DO have free will. Free
will means multiple choices, doesn't it? And multiple choices are what the
Copenhagen School's probabilistic equations are all about?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How could the concept of free will be right and the assumptions behind the
equations of Quantum Mechanics be wrong? Good question. Yet I'm
certain that we do have free will. And I'm certain that our current
quantum concepts are based on the primitive metaphors underlying our existing
forms of math. Which means there are other metaphors ahead of us that will
make for a more robust math and that will square free will with determinism in
some radically new way.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Now the question is, what could those new metaphors be?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Howard</DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
PTSIZE="10">----------<BR>Howard Bloom<BR>Author of The Lucifer Principle: A
Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History and Global Brain: The Evolution
of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to the 21st Century<BR>Visiting Scholar-Graduate
Psychology Department, New York University; Core Faculty Member, The Graduate
Institute<BR>www.howardbloom.net<BR>www.bigbangtango.net<BR>Founder:
International Paleopsychology Project; founding board member: Epic of Evolution
Society; founding board member, The Darwin Project; founder: The Big Bang Tango
Media Lab; member: New York Academy of Sciences, American Association for the
Advancement of Science, American Psychological Society, Academy of Political
Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society, International Society for Human
Ethology; advisory board member: Youthactivism.org; executive editor -- New
Paradigm book series.<BR>For information on The International Paleopsychology
Project, see: www.paleopsych.org<BR>for two chapters from <BR>The Lucifer
Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History, see
www.howardbloom.net/lucifer<BR>For information on Global Brain: The Evolution of
Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century, see
www.howardbloom.net<BR></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>