Freeman Dyson

Planet Earth is a sanctuary for life and growth, it has all the supplies and minerals necessary for organism survival. It thus goes without saying that planets like this are very rare. In the milky way there are an estimated 400 billion planets, of which only 11 billion are in the Goldilocks zone (the habitable zone in a solar system where H2O is a liquid). If one calculates that it shows that only 2.75% of all the planets in our solar system are potentially habitable. Planet Earth is gradually becoming less habitable, due to over-population of the human race, and relatively soon, the Earth will run out of resources required to sustain mankind. A new planet will then be required to sustain our needs. However moving millions upon billions of people to another planet requires unfathomable amounts of energy, energy not accessible on Earth, but in the Sun. I will be designing a network of mirrors to collect this energy, also known as a dyson-swarm. The dyson-swarm works by having mirrors reflect the energy from the Sun into a concentrated beam of heat, to be then later converted into energy. This would offer unimaginable quantities of energy for mankind to help fight against global problems such as climate change, and colonizing new planets.

In this work we outline the problem of the "fundational" relations between Physics and Biology by taking into consideration systemic approaches and classical and quantum models of emergence, as a guide we use the Principle of Indifference by Mario Ageno. We will see that the possibility to consider Biology as a "living phase Physics" remains an open question, on the other hand the problems of autonomy and organizational
dynamics in system/environment relations seem to find a promising set of tools in the framework of models of complexity theories.

There has been a recent upsurge of interest in ‘physical eschatology’ and, in particular, in the idea that, in the far–distant future, intelligent life will spread from earth to the rest of the universe. Although some of the early seeds were sown by Freeman Dyson, the main proponent of this idea has been Frank Tipler. Tipler (1995)—a book devoted solely to the elaboration of Tipler’s ‘Omega Point Theory’—was released with an enormous fanfare, and it spent many weeks near the top of the bestseller charts. In this paper, I cast a critical eye over some aspects of the theory which Tipler develops.

Dyson defined the rank of a partition (as the first part minus the number of parts) whilst investigating certain congruences in the sequence p−1(n). The rank has been widely studied as have been other statistics, such as the crank. In this paper a “birank” is defined which relates to ordered pairs of partitions, and is used in an elementary proof of a congruence in p−2(n).

Abstract Norma Goethe:
This paper revisits some of Chateaubriand's critical considerations with regard to representing our reasoning practices in logic and mathematics by means of "idealized syntax". I focus on the persistently critical side of these considerations which aim to prepare the ground for "an interesting epistemology of logic and mathematics" that ought to make room for understanding the pragmatic dimensions of proofs as explanatory rational displays. First, I discuss the 20 th century "syntactic conception" of the logical and the underlying set of values it upholds. Secondly, I revisit the syntactic constraints on systematizing our formal forms of reasoning and ask about the relationship between "idealized" proofs construed as "syntactic objects" and the variety of formal forms of reasoning with its uses of the logical by the research mathematician. Finally, I consider the reasons why Chateaubriand thinks the syntactic requirements of "logical rigor" cannot be fulfilled, and why they ought not to be on the agenda. I conclude my paper by pointing to a deeper assumption which needs to be critically revisited as it stands in the way to what the author envisages as an "interesting epistemology of logic and mathematics".

Abstract response:
Norma Goethe addresses my criticisms of the notion of formal proof as a representation of the practice of proving, and in the process revisits large portions of my discussion of proof. I agree with many of her comments, and direct my response to two specific issues. The first concerns the essential features of proof, and the second the distinction between actual proofs and idealized proofs.

Le roman le plus célèbre de l’écrivain américain Larry Niven, intitulé L’Anneau-monde (1970), est le premier à avoir été explicitement vendu et présenté comme un roman de hard science fiction (alors que ce sous-genre existait bien avant sa publication). En proposant à la fois une analyse du texte et de sa réception par les critiques et les lecteurs, cet article rend compte du fait que les récits de science-fiction, loin de n’être que des fantaisies sans fondement, obéissent à des impératifs de réalisme, voire de crédibilité scientifique. En l’occurrence, en écrivant un tel roman, Larry Niven n’a pas seulement pris position dans le champ de la littérature de la science-fiction américaine, il s’est également engagé dans un dialogue scientifique indirect – par texte interposé – avec le mathématicien et physicien Freeman J. Dyson, tout en proposant une variante du concept de « biosphère artificielle » que ce dernier avait développé dans un article académique antérieur.

This theoretical essay draws on the spatial theory of Henri Lefebvre and others; as well as recent technoscientific ethnography (Lisa Messeri) and cultural-architectural history (Fred Scharmen) within Space Studies; as well as the ideas of space-settlement found in the work of Gerard O'Neill, Timothy Leary, and Freeman Dyson.

It proceeds and concludes by synthesizing these threads into a particular conceptual assemblage which makes spatial, political, and ontological arguments concerning strategies, tactics, and operations of/in praxis within the frame of the contemporary and everyday life, as well as towards long-term goals involving these topics with special focus centering the entwined foci of:

1) Spatial praxis and the production of space;
2) Post-scarcity and cyborg-Posthumanist futures, which reach out towards space settlement beyond the territory of the Earth.

The essay is also served with original digital art by the author.

[This is a pre-publication final draft and may visually differ from the final physical publication.]

Buy the (beautiful!) zine @ https://tinyurl.com/5c8wxb4n

Περιοδικό ''e-Διάλογοι'' τευχ. 10ο.
Επιμέλεια : Αλέξανδρου ΤΖΙΟΛΑ.
Μία συνέντευξη με τον Freeman DYSON :
- «H συνείδηση είναι ένα μυστήριο ίδιο με την προέλευση της ζωής».
- «Ο Δαρβίνος δεν μας είπε όλη την ιστορία».
- «Αν δεν καταλάβουμε τις εποχές των παγετώνων δεν θα καταλάβουμε το κλίμα».
- «Υπάρχει σκοπός στη ζωή και στο σύμπαν, που περιέχει ενδείξεις νοητικών λειτουργιών σε τρία επίπεδα».
- «Τα μυστήρια του κόσμου δεν είναι μόνο θέμα της επιστήμης αλλά και της θρησκείας».
-Είμαστε ένα απειλούμενο είδος.
- Tα καλά έργα είναι σημαντικότερα από τη θεολογία.