• [deleted]

Vladimir,

You contradict yourself:

You wrote: "The simple and elegant equivalence principle (gravity = acceleration) had to carry the excessive baggage of SR with its unphysical and unrealistic postulate that c is constant. That twisted the whole universe into a complicated and unphysical geometrical pattern."

But then you wrote: "But do not worry, in the area of physics that you seem most concerned with, even in my theory in the absence of gravity or other fields measured lengths contracts and clock time dilates, so in effect c remains constant."

Perhaps, if Einstein's speed-of-light postulate is "unphysical and unrealistic", then its consequences - length contraction and time dilation - are just theoretical artifacts that correspond to nothing in the real world?

Pentcho Valev

    Dear Vladimir F. Tamari,

    First I would like to thank you for pointing out some 5 very good essays in this competition. All of them are great and represent a new thought process integrated into contemporary interpretation of nature. They all represent a much higher level of understanding of contemporary physics than that is available with me. My comments are therefore reflective of an enterpretation from Pico-Physics point of view of reality that is subject matter of the discussions at these blogs.

    I will try to summarise my comments in a logical fashion, and provide the same in this blog. In this essay, you have brought out the difficulty of contemporary thought processes in physics to present an integrated view of nature.

    Pico-Physics starts with the assumption that this is very much on the cards and identifies a power statement (Unary Law) 'Space Contains Matter (Knergy)' as the point of integration. PicoPhysics starts from here, and with minimal additional assumptions is able to explain observations on nature. You will get a glimpse of the same on my comments on the topics of these essays.

    Thanks & Best Regards,

    Vijay Gupta

    Note:

    PicoPhysics was the name given to my thought process to make it in-personal. It means a thought process which is independant of dimensions of object and observer. Thus the mother law is valid and true in all dimensions sub particle to dimensions of universe (astronomical).

    Unary law - 'Sapce Contains Matter-Knergy', In PicoPhysics is new first principle sought in your essay.

    My essay 5-dimensions of universe is an attempt to guage the reaction to basic concepts in PicoPhysics. It is simple, and power statement at variance to general preception and thought process 3-4 dimensions of space without contradicting the same that reflects truth. It was expected that it will attract people's attention.

    In Picophysics we prove 'space' in unary law needs to have 3-dimensions and then identify with space of contemporary physics.

    I believe still more factual evidence is required for people to get out of the concept of conservation and understand need to ammend the same to Konservation.

    I am more or less retired, as a result of stroke I suffered last year. So I spend some time on this blog and document some thoughts that I developed since 1960s. PicoPhysics work gives me a satisfaction of being able to understand the nature and being at piece with it. The short life expectancy is also a motivation to create my blog at picophysics.org

    Dear Mr Vladimir,

    I wholly subscribe to your views expressed in the essay 'Fix Physics . . '. I agree that A paradigm shift in physics is now overdue and assumptions such as 'photon-as-particle' 'quantum probability' and 'flexible space-time' are required to be understood in a better context. I also agree with the statement 'present day physics appears grossly and unnecessarily complicated'.

    I agree with statement 'Physics was not invented (or discovered) in one go, but was built, one assumption on top of another.' Now it is time to fix it at foundations itself. The foundations define the dynamics or change that occurs in universe. Force and its reaction are drivers of the change. Behind these drivers is the conservation concept. In PicoPhysics we are improving this concept by making a distinction between Konservation and Conservation. This small distinction re-enforces the contemporary physics by integrating all of it together into a single statement (Postulate) called unary law.

    You have posed a proper question - If simpler explanations can be found shouldn't they be adopted?

    The answer to same is very complex. FQXI is giving us a platform, where we can speak our mind and we are all thankful for the same. For new radical thinking - there are multiple barriers to surpass. Language itself is a problem in expressing something fundamentally different. I have always found language to be a challenge to express thought process of PicoPhysics

    Fix Physics

    PicoPhysics View: Physics has developed thru generalization of human intuition into concepts and statements valid in different environment. Later the scope of these concepts is made conditional, making room for continuous improvement as human knowledge of nature gathered steam. So the truth and validity of concepts and statements of contemporary Physics can not be denied as at there base is human intuition based on observed facts of nature. It can be qualified and new ground level set for concepts and statements developed. PicoPhysics is an effort in this direction.

    The reconstruction of first principles is thus a need of the times as contemporary physics gradually failing to keep pace with continuously increasing human knowledge about universe.

    Mis-match assumptions 'photon-as-particle' 'quantum probability' and 'flexible space-time' are required to be understood in a better context.

    As a PicoPhysicist, I would like to answer questions raised by you;

    Q1: ARE MATTER, SPACE & RADIATION MADE OF DIFFERENT STUFF?

    Yes, while matter and radiation are geo-forms of Knergy, space is independent of Knergy.

    Q2: DOES TIME REALLY EXIST?

    Yes, It exist as a dimension of Knergy. This dimension is mapped onto space in the drift direction and provides meaning to word 'Contain' of unary law. However Samay is chronological dimension and defines the gap between instants and simultaneity.

    Q3: IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT ACTUALLY CONSTANT, SPACETIME FLEXIBLE & THE ETHER NONEXISTENT?

    Yes, qualified - needs to account for space heterogeneity introduced by presence of matter in the vicinity. Presence of matter increases space density and apparent reduction in speed of light.

    Q4: DOES GRAVITY REALLY WARP SPACE AND TIME?

    Question is not relevant to PicoPhysics. Gravitation is due to heterogeneity of space. For gravitation force to exist a space density gradient is a pre-requisite. Greater is the gradient; greater is deviation of light towards higher density (lower radius of curvature).

    Q5: IS THE PHOTON A PARTICLE & DO PARTICLES GENERATE WAVE FIELDS?

    Yes, Photon is a particle composed of unit Knergy.

    Yes, it creates a disturbance in space it traverses due to consumption of space by Knergy. The disturbance propagates with the photon, and appears as a pulse.

    Q6: WHAT IS THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF QUANTUM PROBABILITY,

    UNCERTAINTY & ENTANGLEMENT ?

    When in an interaction, a transfer of Knergy is involved, it happens between period identified between two states of the system. Exact instant when it happens is unpredictable. To intuitive visualization of interaction - position of reactants or time of exchange is undefined during the period. Uncertainty principle is an expression of this phenomenon. A rejection of Knergy Quanta by receiver results in Entanglement - an interaction without final change of Knergy of reacting particles.

    Q7: WHAT IS THE PHYSICAL BASIS FOR THE STANDARD MODEL?

    As of now, PicoPhysics do not understand Standard Model. Its model of particle is based on confinement of Knergy in repetitive circular motion due to unary interaction (Refraction) resulting from self-sustaining Knergy distribution.

    Q8: Are Dark Energy and Dark Matter the same as a repulsive Universal

    Dielectric ether?

    No, Dark Energy or Matter is low density distribution of Knergy, such that consumption of space by Knergy present equals the generation rate of free space. This practically isolates the dark energy from affecting other Knergy identities. (Dark Energy does not interact with others by gravitation).

    Q9: If the Ether is made of repulsive particles would the Big Bang start not from a point, but a volume cluster of these particles?

    This question is not relevant. As the universe is in a continuous equilibrium state, where some matter is being formed out of dark energy and other is transformed into dark energy. Knergy follows something like a matter cycle - changing its form from Dark energy, Elementary Particles, Matter, Astronomical objects, Photons, Cosmic Back Ground Radiations, Dark Matter. The matter cycle begins and ends with Dark Matter as most stable form of existence of Knergy.

    Originally, I thought I would provide a glimpse of my comments on other excellent essays suggested by you. But after reading your essay, I thought otherwise. But my comments are available with discussion on individual essay.

    Thanks and best Regards,

    Vijay Gupta

    Proponent - Unary Law 'Space Contains Knergy'.

      Excellent Juan

      I like your "no theories or cats were harmed in my essay" - but if (FTG) and my (BU) are the correct theories then (GR) is not only harmed but mortally challenged! I will have to study your work more in detail.

      Thanks for the two figures - well done! They perfectly parralel my own views that flexible spacetime (a la GR) can be replaced by the idea of energy density of space. I am sure a classical explanation can show the equivelance of the force and density concepts. Please see the attached two figures from my 1993 paper "United Dipole Field" (its on arXiv) . The colored figure is from my 2005 Beautiful Universe theory which is a generalization of the dipole paper. The question is when will the physics community accept our views?!

      VladimirAttachment #1: 1_BUFIG27.jpg

      Dear PicoPhysicist Sri Vijay

      I appreciate your having closely read my fqxi essay - you are the only one who has answered all nine questions posed therin! Please forgive this hasty reply, but for the moment I will list below just your statements that I unequivecally agree on:

      Q3 ..."Presence of matter increases space density and apparent reduction in speed of light." Yes.

      Q4 "For gravitation force to exist a space density gradient is a pre-requisite. Greater is the gradient; greater is deviation of light towards higher density (lower radius of curvature)." Yes.

      Q5 "Yes, it creates a disturbance in space it traverses ... The disturbance propagates with the photon, and appears as a pulse." Yes (omitting for the moment reference to K energy which I do not yet understand.

      Q.8 "Dielectric Ether?" Yes.

      Respectfully

      Vladimir

      Dear Pentcho

      I find it strange that you did not respond to my comments about Einstein's statements concerning the speed of light (1911 etc.) but changed the topic to the 'contradictions' you have pointed out.

      Actually there is no contradiction. In these fqxi essays and discussions there is no room for a full description of one's ideas. When objecting to the constancy of the speed of light I should always add that I believe there is a *maximum* speed of light c in a vacuum free of gravity and e/m fields, but that light slows down in denser media such as a gravitational field, air, water or glass etc.

      "Perhaps, if Einstein's speed-of-light postulate is "unphysical and unrealistic", then its consequences - length contraction and time dilation - are just theoretical artifacts that correspond to nothing in the real world?"

      Not at all: There is actual contraction of the measured length of the object *not of space itself*, and a slowing down of clock time *not a dilation of time itself* in different inertial frames.

      Cheers

      Vladimir

      Dear Vladmir,

      I belive you will appreciate the answers to your questions are resulting from an integrated thought process based on Unary Law - Space Contains Knergy.

      I read your paper, as it has much better readability. There are some others who are fit for publication in Physics Review and written for, by and readable to contemporary scientists.

      I will appreciate if you can evaluate my comments on other papers pointed by you as significant contributions in the competition.

      Thanks & Best Regards,

      Vijay Gupta

      Proponent - Unary Law 'Space Contain Knergy'.

      After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I assess the level of each submitted work. Accordingly, I rated some essays, including yours.

      Cood luck.

      Sergey Fedosin

      Hi Vladimir,

      Thanks for your further explanation. It's good to know that our perspectives are aligned and I'll read more from your website to get a better understanding. Your question is important but I'm afraid it's not so simple to give an answer right away. I'm not aware of any literature treating the issue outside of the GR paradigm. I just checked Penfield and Haus "Electrodynamics of Moving Media" and though there is a very brief discussion of gravity I see no analysis of how electrodynamics is affected.

      Permittivity and permeability for a medium are derived from the dispersion relations. i.e., the equations for determining them would be derived in a similar manner as the Lorentz-Lorenz formula. To do that, I'd use a similar procedure to what is shown in my essay for the interaction of an electron with incident fields, but would add to the Lorentz force law a force equation for the difference of gravitational force on 2 sides of the electron.

      Without doing the work, I think you would find that yes, there would be a change in the effective permittivity and permeability values in the vicinity of an object of strong gravitational fields. But that is a very preliminary assessment.

      Cheers,

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      Vladimir,

      You wrote: " When objecting to the constancy of the speed of light I should always add that I believe there is a *maximum* speed of light c in a vacuum free of gravity and e/m fields, but that light slows down in denser media such as a gravitational field, air, water or glass etc."

      The problem is different. See this:

      Roger Barlow, Professor of Particle Physics: "The Doppler effect - changes in frequencies when sources or observers are in motion - is familiar to anyone who has stood at the roadside and watched (and listened) to the cars go by. It applies to all types of wave, not just sound. (...) Moving Observer. Now suppose the source is fixed but the observer is moving towards the source, with speed v. In time t, ct/(lambda) waves pass a fixed point. A moving point adds another vt/(lambda). So f'=(c+v)/(lambda)."

      "In time t, ct/(lambda) waves pass a fixed point." That is, the speed of the waves relative to the fixed observer is c.

      "A moving point adds another vt/(lambda)." That is, the speed of the waves relative to the moving observer becomes c'=c+v.

      Is c'=c+v correct, Vladimir?

      Pentcho Valev

      If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [math]R_1 [/math] and [math]N_1 [/math] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [math]S_1=R_1 N_1 [/math] of points. After it anyone give you [math]dS [/math] of points so you have [math]S_2=S_1+ dS [/math] of points and [math]N_2=N_1+1 [/math] is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have [math]S_2=R_2 N_2 [/math] of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be: [math]S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] (S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1[/math] In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points [math]dS [/math] then the participant`s rating [math]R_1 [/math] was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.

      Sergey Fedosin

        Thank you Vladimir,

        I did mean that only people who still believes that GR is a kind of final theory will be troubled by the new research. However, the theory itself does not care!

        I have downloaded the Beautiful Universe theory figure to my desktop.

        Recall that the force is computed from a field potential. Therefore the density of energy varies locally (in the special case when this density is uniform, the force is zero).

        Regards

        Pentacho

        I am sorry but please excuse me from engaging on these SR questions with you here. I have certain ideas and they may be right or wrong, but they need more study.

        Good luck to you

        Vladimir

        Thank you Sergey, I read and rated your essy with a comment on your page. I agree with you, as many have noted, that the current rating system is badly flawed. I am sure the administrators realize it by now after all the complaints.

        Best wishes,

        Vladimir

        Thanks Juan

        The Beautiful Universe theory needs a lot of work, especially in converting the ideas to quantitative formulations. And there are a lot of particles to be assembled from the dipole nodes, like spherical lego sculptures.

        Yes the gradient of the potential is what creates force - but in BU the local density is not simply a scalar, but it has vector properties. The angle between adjacent node's magnetic axes defines gravity. I really need to illustrate and analyze this in better ways.

        Vladimir

        Thanks Stephen

        Change of velocity is defined locally as a change of the index of refraction n= c/v where v is the local speed of light. These ideas were explored briefly by Thomas Young and later Eddington, and are a basic concept in my Beautiful Universe Theory . Speed of light in Maxwell's equations is related to the ratio of the permittivity and permeability. You say the formulation is more complex than that in the presence of gravitation...but what if (n) is linearly related to the local dielectric density of the rotating dipole- nodes, in units of (h)? Wouldn't that then relate angular momentum in (h) to permittivity to permeability to (V) ? You have a more systematic mathematical mind and training it will be nice if the relations are linear as I anticipate they are. Anyway this is a rather unfocused off the cuff reply, and it obviously needs more analysis. In my studies of streamline diffraction in the 1980's I speculate that the bending of the diffracted streamlines around the obstacle are exactly akin to the bending of light in (GR)= ie the speed slows down with curvature and deceleration.

        I strongly feel that this needs to to come out of whatever simple final theory of gravity proves correct both in the very near atomic and far fields.

        By the way read Juan Miguel Marín's essay here - he relates density to Riemann geometry.

        Best wishes,

        Vladimir

        Yes, just as you say. I'm been focusing on developing the mathematics at the fundamental level, i.e., the microscopic level of elementary particles. But as you step up a level or two to the macroscopic realm you may determine the permittivity and permeability on the basis of the volume density of each particle species (just as you say). From there you can fairly easily determine the effective propagation speed of EM waves.

        I'll look at Juan Miguel Marín's essay. It sounds logical that density relates to Riemann geometry, just as the dielectric tensors used to determine values in the constitutive relations are microscopic homomorphisms of the tensors used in Minkowski's electrodynamics for macroscopic calculations. Obviously getting things right in the microscopic domain has large advantages to only getting something that sort of works in the macroscopic domain.

        Steve

        • [deleted]

        Vladimir,

        The fact that the speed of light varies with phi, the gravitational potential, cannot be denied. In 1911 Einstein adopted the equation c'=c(1+phi/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light, then in the final version of general relativity the speed of light became even more variable: c'=c(1+2phi/c^2).

        Yet Einsteinians never discuss this for a simple reason: if photons slow down as they leave the gravitational field of a star, then they come here on earth at a decreased speed c' lower than c. Einsteinians exercise themselves in crimestop in such cases:

        George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."

        Pentcho Valev

          • [deleted]

          Dear Vladimir,

          I have just put up a link to a web site giving further explanation of the RICP explanatory framework on my essay thread. I really appreciated your response to my essay and thought on the basis of that you might be interested. So here is a link to it for your convenience foundations of the new building 'prototype' you talked about?

          I do need to add further links to that site, giving more information and relevant scientific papers and need to do something more with the recent discussions of truth.It is, I hope, still a useful introduction.

          Kind regards Georgina