ENTROPY AND DIAGNOSIS IN MEDICINE

Hi Dr. Vishnu, good to hear from you again!

I'm afraid I was unable to stay within the scope of your article, for reasons that are hopefully evident. These are some questions and ideas I had from reading it, though.

Is it possible that knowledge and/or information can be encoded and operated upon quantum mechanically? If so, would there then be any physical limitations regarding storing a finite amount of information in a state of superposition, or reaching accurate conclusions irrespective to any otherwise proportional amount of time upon resolution (or upon 'decoherence') of the superposition?

Is the human brain a just thing for memory and thinking, or might it also be an evolved interface between the energy of conscious thought and the more physical aspects of reality? I would like to think that my memories and experiences are unique to me and surely to some extent they are, but without ever knowing of a man called Eratosthenes, I went down one of the paths he took, and invariably arrived at the same reality (referred to as the 'Sieve of Eratosthenes')... Point being, different mind, different time, different place, different circumstances, same underlying reality. So there are abstract aspects of reality that are forever unchanging, and yet, if life evolves then so does reality.

A mind to observe reality is not a prerequisite for the existence of reality. A mind evolves because the possibility to do so is resolved along with everything else that reality is. Why are human minds generally more capable than minds of any of the other animals? ('Capability' is defined here as the act of predicting the future of reality and subsequently interacting with reality to produce some desired effects, which have been determined by the mind to result in a more beneficial, easier-to-survive, easier-to-manage reality.) The human mind is generally most capable because nature is hierarchical in fundamental composition, and knowledge is inherently discriminatory when it comes to categorization of diversity. As the mind evolves, so does reality, for the mind is a part of reality, and yet the reality, both realized and yet-to-be-realized, always fits within the mind (unlike the case for conventional computer hardware and “materialized� information [programs and data]). So utopia, I would venture to say, is reality understanding itself... :)

Surely human physiology is replete with an underlying reality, and conclusions reached about it, if they are the correct conclusions, should be equivalent regardless of the approach. So objectivity in full measure is retained when conclusions are evaluated, and anthropomorphic tendencies identified, but the conclusions should not be discounted when they are correct just because of an anthropomorphic taint. It doesn't take much scientific rigor to conclude that humans are special, and have a unique role in reality, among all the other creatures...

I think that before the solar system was, reality is. Any manifestation of something abstract from reality, into a physical existence, will require a commensurate amount of time to run its course, and in so doing, it appears like something evolving (e.g., a computer program crunching the data). I guess this would mean that the evolution of life is just reality's program (decoherence of the original, initial superposition of states?), running its course...

I think that replacing anthropomorphism with some 'objective' theriomorphism would demean what's special about the most capable, but I cannot say which is the shortest path to understanding reality and reaching the correct conclusions about that which is eternal and that which is passing (or evolving)...