Dao of Design: How Greek Beauty Synergises Chinese Fortune

I’m sharing how elegance in nature transforms into sustainability in culture, why beauty flows in time.

The new Asynsis principle-Constructal law design paradigm: bridging western geometry and eastern philosophy to help design a more sustainable, beautiful global future.

TEDx Wanchai – Saturday 23 August 2014: 9.30am-6pm The Dao of Design: Form follows Flow http://www.tedxwanchai.com/venue.php Hi Everyone, I’m lucky enough to be sharing the Asynsis principle, how elegance in nature transforms into beauty & sustainability in culture, how beauty flows in time.

Please join us! From last year’s event, each and every speaker had an inspiring and uplifting story about how they (and we – by example), can make a positive difference to the world, to our peers and for ourselves.

E8 – Feigenbaum – From Areas to Points/Points to Areas – Universality

φ-Phi vrs ORCH-OR: As Above, So Below

Towards a Science of Consciousness Conference, Tuscon, April 2014

Dialogue over 2014 following the Towards a Science of Consciousness Conference, Tuscon, Arizona, 2014 between Stuart Hameroff MD and Nigel Reading RIBA:

The role of shared Asynsis geometries in two rival leading theories of consciousness, the classical computational Phi-Integrated Information Theory of Giulio Tononi and the quantum-gravity computational Orchestrated Objective Reduction Theory of Roger Penrose & Stuart Hameroff – can their common Asynsis geometries be the bridge?

“In a sense it takes us back to Pythagoras—you know in Sicily, the Greek philosopher and mathematician in Sicily who said that everything is ultimately numbers.

It ultimately makes this assertion that consciousness is a particular informational structure in a high dimensional space.”

Sounds just like the elementary #Asynsis geometry E8 ToE of Garrett Lisi (please also refer to Galileo’s irreducible Φ – Cyclotomic roots of Unity(?) reference on page 164 of Tononi’s Φ book):

“… So that’s the advantage of IIT. So IIT—finally, we have something that philosophers have not been able to do over the last 2,600 years with a precise mathematical definition of what it is, how to measure it. In fact, that’s … It has this number called Φ that measures sort of the quantity. It has an informational structure that measures the quality of it so you can now make some very precise statements about consciousness.”

So like Hofstadter’s loops, my mind (and yours) are on my mind, and the amazing fact that both the leading Φ-IIT and OrchOR theories of consciousness are based on the #Universality of #SelfOrganisedCritical #Asynsis geometries facilitating maximum entropy generation and universality computation via optimal energy dissipation (perhaps even emerging from a quantum-classical neo-Platonic scale for OrchOR).

So to cuisine; it seems the Promethean invention of cooking allowed for our better (calorie) burning (and information processing), brains. (Good) Form follows (True) Flow in information processing too.

Cooking food means the energy otherwise used for the digestion of raw food in apes can instead be used to power our brains. So our minds are like the cooking fire, fuelled by more calorific material (just like wood and oxygen would have done for a real primordial fire in the African Rift Valley where we evolved), burning bigger and brighter, emitting more heat and light.
More energy equals higher order phase transitions, higher dimensions or nested permutations and feedback, taking our minds to a regime analogous to Penrose tessellations, the Chaotic bands of the Feigenbaum diagram or the infinitely varied, multi-scale boundary of the Mandelbrot set.

The lowest energy, optimal and analogical route to those regimes is via the golden ratio – #AsynsisConstructal path. Entropy is generated, but because it is an energy-dissipative, exothermic combustion process (like a flame emitting heat and light), local entropy is reduced – the flowing flame form being like a plasma, while global entropy is exported – in the form of smoke and ashes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire

Perhaps the reason flame-like consciousness has a fractal, holographic multidimensional nature can originally be traced to the #Asynsis Icosahedral/Dodecahedral dual E8 Lie group, since it may be the fundamental, elementary geometry that our world emerges from?

So I suggest that we are more conscious than say, a chimp (or any other creature) – because our brains burn brighter, consuming more energy for our body mass, than theirs do. That higher Φ-IIT value results from a higher order phase-transition/dimensional regime of neuronal processes, generated by greater energy consumption per body mass than any other animal.

What might that higher dimensional computational space be ultimately derived from?

The suggestion is: Life’s Spark is Ignited from the Quantum (“cloud-computing”) realm, as an #Asynsis geometry-fractal resonance up into the Classical scale as Universality in “devices and apps” like us.

Φ-IIT/OrchOR Consciousness is its Apple-like (synergised hardware-software) apotheosis.

Seeking a “middle path” between the Orch OR & Phi-IIT positions by exploring their common optimal, analogical geometries

Some Asynsis-Constructal speculations on the relationships between the Orch OR theory of Penrose-Hameroff-Bandyopadhyayand Phi-IIT theory of Tononi-Koch-Tegmark in terms of Chalmer’s Hard problem of the subjective self and optimal, analogical geometries.

Based on exchanges with the principals immediately after the TSC Conference at the University of Arizona, Tuscon, April 2014

If confirmed, this appears to be more Asynsis-Constructal QED – more evidence (this time from celestial mechanics), that optimal, analogical geometries best describe Constructal behaviours in nature at all scales and time frames.

“The logical conclusion is that feedback is present via perturbations between the planets and Sun which arranges the planets into an order which minimises work done, enhances stability and maximises entropy. This calls to mind the Constructal law, stated by Adrian Bejan in 1996 as follows:

“For a finite-size system to persist in time (to live), it must evolve in such a way that it provides easier access to the imposed currents that flow through it.”

A true system contains cybernetic feedback. The Phi relationships demonstrated here are evidence that the solar system truly is a system in the full sense of the word.”

So in the spirit of Voltaire (and to paraphrase): we may disagree on some issues (such as the relative importance of anthropogenic vs solar-variation climate change), but we must defend everyone’s right to their opinion, especially if it’s sincerely held.

Time and more good science, will tell.

After all, toleration of dissenting views is not only a sign of enlightened civilisation, (we can hardly revert to how we persecuted Giordano Bruno for his ‘many worlds’ beliefs, which is now part of standard cosmology); but also of optimal system-balancing feedback according to the Asynsis-Constructal position, high-Phi-IIT/self-organised critical, phase transition regimes. Therefore by being pluralistic and tolerating dissent, we are perhaps also, both following and revealing – a newly understood dynamical, emergent property of nature.

Seeking a “middle path” between the Orch OR & Phi-IIT positions by exploring their common optimal, analogical geometries

Some Asynsis-Constructal speculations on the relationships between the Orch OR theory of Penrose-Hameroff-Bandyopadhyayand Phi-IIT theory of Tononi-Koch-Tegmark in terms of Chalmer’s Hard problem of the subjective self and optimal, analogical geometries.

Based on exchanges with the principals immediately after the TSC Conference at the University of Arizona, Tuscon, April 2014