◄ BACK My point here, David, is that quantum mechanics may be looking at  and mixing up  two (or more) different levels of physicality  the structure of objects, and the separately existing structure of the physical thoughts which refer to them (whether or not the objects actually exist). I'd like to propose an argument that figuring out a math problem and writing a letter are expedited by the same core mental processes. The argument is based on the concept of physical ideas. The concept of physical ideas is based on two assumptions: (1) The Big Bang (or some other "starting time or times" vitalized by energy) is valid; and (2) E=MCC. Then: 1) The Big Bang created a Universe of energy;
This establishes an interlocking structure of physical ideas. And what are these "ideas"? Since they are composed of energy, ideas are physical particles arranged in unique designs  designs mandated by the power relationships  energy relationships, understood in mathematical terms  among the particles composing the ideas. (The ideas themselves are the relationships among the particles I am not a logician, but to me the "sense" of the argument is clear: 1) we live in a physical universe; 2) the ideas that exist in this universe are also physical; 3) these ideas (like Plato's Ideals) exist independently of an observer. If we add one more element to this picture  an equivalency between logic and mathematics  then we can establish that mathematics and poetry are products of the same mental processes. We can take the easy road for that: the MerriamWebster dictionary states: Logic  "The fundamental principles and the connection of circuit elements for arithmetical computation in a computer." In other words, logical circuits produce results indistinguishable from mathematical results. Physical ideas, as described here, are particles arranged in unique designs mandated by the mathematical relationships among the particles composing the ideas. Increasing the number of particles is equivalent to joining more ideas together. Since the joining of particles is governed by forces measurable by mathematics, and insofar as mathematics is a subset of logic (or viceversa ! ), then this joining is what we call logical thinking. This is more than just playing with words. If we can prove that ideas have a physical aspect then we can bring down the barriers between the physical and social sciences  because energy relationships will be the common denominator to every knowledge discipline. If ideas can be proven not to have a physical existence, then no harm done  we are just back where we started. Physical ideas, as described here, are particles arranged in unique designs mandated by themathematical relationships among the particles composing the ideas. Increasing the number of particles is equivaIent to joining more ideas together. Since the joining of particles is governed by forces measurable by mathematics, and insofar as mathematics is a subset of logic (or vice versa ! ), then this joining is what we call logical thinking. This is more than just playing with words. If we can prove that ideas have a physical aspect then we can bring down the barriers between the physical and social sciences  because energy relationships will be the common denominator to every knowledge discipline. If ideas can be proven not to have a physical existence, then no harm done  we are just back where we started. If there existed an algorithm that assigned values to idea quantities  for example, Red=4 bits, Green=4 bits, Blue=4 bits  then all the colors of the rainbow, each equivalent to a different idea, could be represented in an XYZ bit deep binary universe. This simple demonstration could be the basis for other simulations in which opposites are given values and intermediate ideas are derived. TallMediumShort, HotCoolCold, etc. The real challenge would come when contexts are mixed and an actual "thinking" algorithm is produced. I don't pretend to have this all figured out. But it certainly seems doable at a theoretical level. And it can be done in simulation.
◄ BACK
