• [deleted]

  • Post #50

Hello from Belgium,

Mr Gupta,

I am understanding. But you know, the real aim of a real searcher is to accept the truth. In fact , the most important probelm inside the international sciences community is this vanity.And you know what Mr Gupta? It blocks and decreases the velocity of evolution.Because simply people prefers continuing on their false roads.Just for what Mr Gupta ? I accept always a rational work, and I critic always sincerely.But why people does not accept the rational and ddterministic critics? have you an other explaination that this vanity , you Mr Gupta. You know it exists people who merits to be recognized, for their works, their years of works !!! and it exists people who insists on their false roads.They do not evolve in fact, they just try to be recognized.

The aim is not to add irrational works, but to analyze correctly our pure 3D SPACE TIME ,I am repeating, 3D.

You know Mr Gupta, you must differenciate what is our pure determinsitic universe and its vectors

and on the other side the pure philosophy implying a false vectorial causality. You cannot consider the dimensions like you make it in fact.

I just critic with a sincere heart. We are not here to take gloves when we speak about our deterministic sciences. That said, I found your reasonings intresting in a pure philosophical point of vue, spiritual even.

You know I am also an universalist, but I am rational about our causes , vectors, scalars , dimensions,laws, .....

Mr Reed,

Space is simple and complex, we are still far of our walls, but we approach all days. I see the space like cited above.The lattices, them at the quantum scale, are interesting in my humble model of spherization Theory.Because they disappear in the perfect contact , considering all entangled spheres of the serie of uniqueness.It is logic because we begin from the main central sphere, the most important volume. If the space and the mass and the light are the same when they do not turn , so it is relevant when we consider the rotations and the volumes.The proportions appear.If the light turns in the other sense than gravity.So we can understand why the light is in straight line, linear. The codes, at my humble opinion are mainly inside the singularities of this mass, the complementary due to the coded light like a pure information become relevant. It is complex this polarization m/hv.What I find very relevant is that the universal fractal of uniqueness implies a perfect contact where the lattices between entangled spheres disappear.The space becomes very relevant in this line of reasoning.But can you say that this space does not exist really physically speaking? This space has properties and is under our universal 3D spherical laws. But I admit that it is not simple all this puzzle about the space, cosmological and quantical !

Can we check this space ? can we contract the cosmological space between two spheres ? Our technology is young still.

Best Regards to both of you .

Thanks for your kind words,

I would like to mention the following;

1. My essay creates a distinction between space and universe

2. Space is 3-D - repeat 3-D

3. But without Energy there is no Universe

4. Universe gets it's dimensions from space and energy

5. Universe has 5-Dimensions of which 3 are borrowed from space and 2 from energy

PicoPhysics is deterministic theory. Points are below

1. The 2 dimensions from Energy are magnitude and time

2. Combined, They represent an everlasting reality Knergy (Pronounced as Kay-Energy) with a natural unit.

3. Natural unit is aligned with Plank's constant

This makes PicoPhysics a deterministic theory, as probability and complexities of uncertainty principle are simply resolved by everlasting reality measured discreetly with a natural unit.

Thanks & Regards

Vijay Gupta

  • [deleted]

  • Post #52

Hello Mr Gupta,

I am sorry but you cannot utilize the dimensions like that. The energy and the time have their laws. I don't see why you insist on these things.

The extradimensions are just a play of mathematics. Never these maths are rationally correlated with physics.Because the rotations are in 3D at all scales.

I am sorry but I don't agree with the whole of your reasoning. That said I find your spirituality interesting and sincere. But is it sufficient for real rational correlations with our pure deterministic physics.

I don't understand why you say that "This makes picophysics a deterministic theory "

You know, I don't see in the rational books ....extradimensions??? So why people insists on these false sciences, is it a fashion from several teams of some universities ? If yes, I suggest that they learn real foundamental sciences and their pure determinism like you say.

Regards

Good evening Steve,

You are right. In mainstream physics, observations have been isolated, concepts and laws defined specific to an observation, and embed observed reality. It transposes the reality in different other situations and re-establish the truth. Thus a concept being subsequently proved by repeated or more accurate observations, adds little to integrating our knowledge of nature. This is the reason we find repeated failures on theoretical front, but repeated success on experimental front proving theoretical predictions.

When the result are not statistical or expressed in probabilistic terms, but instead are expressed in algebraic terms, the thought process and power sentences (laws) will be collectively called deterministic in the sense the unknown factors resulting to probabilistic approach are minimised.

PicoPhysics is deterministic because;

1. The uncertainty laws have always epitomized probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. It is scintillating explanation of tunnelling across energy barriers and probability of finding a particle all thru the space was start for it to be defined probabilistic. In statistical world, the unknown factors lead to express the results as probability distribution.

2. PicoPhysics provide basic postulates of quantum mechanics in algebraic terminology.

So we say, PicoPhysics is deterministic. It does respect statistics which will be used as needed, but not as core principle. Statistics and probability will be used as a result of our knowledge not being complete, or impracticality of computing or arriving at result with-in time frame of its usefulness.

Thanks & best regards,

Vijay Gupta

Vijay

Re 1st para. No they have not. This is not to say it has all been done properly. But the reality we can scientifically establish is only what we can know of it, using due process. The elephant is not in you head, or in light, we just know of it, via a physical process, at the front end. The processing of physically received input gets more convoluted, unfortunately.

Paul

  • [deleted]

  • Post #55

Good morning dear Mr Gupta,

You continue with a superimposing of irrational dimensionalities. The time is a constant of evolution, irreversible , indeed correlated with the entropy in increasing. But these parameters are not dimensions like vectors.

If the geometrical algebras are inserted with the biggest rational determinism. So we have correct superimposings. But if these algebras are utilized without sense and reason for a kind of business from pseudo scientists.So you shall understand why this world is sick.Just beause these persons , vanitious and frustrated, insist on their stupidities for a kind of notoriety and business. In fact , it is not scientists, but businessmen, it is totalkly different.Their tools are the strategies and the pseudo sciences and the psudo competition for their travels paid by who ? a conference here for their own vanities and for eating.And who paid ? It exists real innovators and it exists the pseudo full of hate and full of pseudo sciences. These systems imply the chaos Mr Gupta.And they ionsist furthermore , just for this monney and the travels. What a world , but we evolve !

Regards

  • [deleted]

  • Post #56

Good morning Peter,

Yesterday night, I replied thanking you for kind words and encouragement it gives me to devote time to PicoPhysics. May be I missed Submit button.

You are right; any model that assumes us at the centre of anything is retrograde. In PicoPhysics world, any model that thinks in terms of center of universe is retrograde itself. Galileo moved center from earth to near sun. The universe, he was concerned about, was sun and planets. In my childhood, I was taught this picture planets moving around sun as universe. In time of Galileo that itself was a big achievement. It made possible for Newton to conceptualize inertia and enunciate to us universe in a very different context (static, kinetics and dynamics) of inertia, force, energy as capacity to do work. We can only imagine his struggle & difficulty in accepting concept of inertia which goes against much of intuitive human learning. PicoPhysics face similar difficulty in accepting Konservation.

In Picophysics, center of the universe in a sense is the location of observer, except for this no center exists. From this center as origin, 3-D space extends in all six directions. Here we have a an unfulfilled requirement - integration of Pythagoras theorem.

3-D space is well integrated into PicoPhysics. But Euclidean Geometry still exists separate from PicoPhysics. Once we are able to integrate Pythagoras theorem into Unary law - 'Space contains Knergy' we would have covered one of the two remaining milestones.

The last milestone to cover is natural units of measure. We have plank's constant and speed of light as natural units of measure. We need a third natural unit of measure. The candidate at this time is electronic charge and Hubble's constant.

Electronic charge as natural unit of measure: Charge of electron, looks to be an ideal candidate as natural unit of measure. It exists in multiple units across whole range of particles and matter. It is not found to exist in parts (except some exceptions that will need to be addressed). However, when we look towards its usefulness it's mass - the electronic mass and radius appears to be equally significant. In this regard, hubble's constant is cleaner but intuitively much more difficult to grasp as a natural unit of measure. We have to choose between the two.

Thus PicoPhysics still requires some work to be completed, before being presented as an alternative to mainstream physics.

The objective of PicoPhysics is integration rather than prediction. However, it does have some predictions that are different from mainstream physics. One important among them is:

Inverse square law: In mainstream physics, presence of source of inverse square law fields such as charge, affects whole of 3-Dimensional space. In PicoPhysics based on infinite order analysis (infinite math - a component of PicoPhysics) does not allow that. This leads to prediction that the affect of charge can not be felt when it falls below a certain level. The same will apply for gravitation. Thus gravitation field also is contained in space as is all inverse square law fields.

The essay 5-D universe is conceived to have a judgement on acceptability of intuitively true statement 'space contains energy' as the fundamental law of nature. But we find the interpretations of E=MC2 as simultaneity equation (that we have used since 1965) is questionable. Mainstream physicist differentiates between mass and energy as exemplified by Higgs Boson as particle contributing to mass of universe.

We are encouraged by response that signifies some thinking minds were able to connect with the heading '5-Dimensional Universe'.

Thanks and Best Regards

Vijay Gupta

    Goodmorning Steve,

    You are again right. Time is evolving and irreversible. We can take it as a law of nature or not bother about the same and keep it in human intuition.

    In PicoPhysics, we attempt to bring out this intuitive knowledge and integrate the same with unary law - 'Space contains Knergy'. Time is such a dimension of reality that is evolving and irrversible. It is brought forward and integrated into Unary law through the definition Knergy as host reality of Konservation concept. It's essential character of irreversibility and non-repeatability is deduced from Konservation of Knergy.

    Thanks and Best Regards,

    Vijay Gupta

    Dear Paul,

    You are right in many respects. There can be different opinions and all may be correct in there own right. Statement 'But the reality we can scientifically establish is only what we can know of it' to me is an opinion.

    I consider, when we are not certain about the location of object, there is nothing we can know about. In PicoPhysics, the uncertainty principle expression spatial boundaries with-in which we shall find the object. They are not expression of probability of finding the object at a point.

    This makes PicoPhysics a deterministic theory Vs Quantum mechanics which is considered statistical or theory of chance (Probability).

    Elephant is an interesting analogy. First it means the observer already knows what an elephant is. Elephant by itself does not exist - it may have died, body burnt or decay with decomposed into nature etc. It is constituents at core - complex organisms->molecules->elements->elementary particles->Knergy. Thus finally it is Konservation that answers existence of all objects as complex reality of nature.

    It is also possible for observer to extrapolate an observation (say the shape & structure of teeth) to say it belongs to a particular elephant. In addition, a limited inspection of patterns on his ears to predict it is an identified living elephant. These conclusions of observer draw on so many other processes and Knowledge that they do not seem relevant when discussing foundations as we want to think in simple terms of cause and effect logic.

    You are right, we need to scientifically establish reality. It again has many facets to it. But theoritical & experimental work is many times related to reality that is already established scientifically. For example the reality that is experimentally established is signal over noice ratio at 5-sigma level when 2-3 Tev protons collide in 120Gev range. We have an existing formulation, that conceived Higgs Boson if they exist will lead to similar results. Joining the two is in process. I differ with respect to postulating Higgs Boson as a particle irself. But people will have different opinion.

    When we say scientific established reality, I belive we are at a state where we need to re-visit scientifically established facts and determine the weekness in the arguments or determinations made in ignorance in the past. May be, if higgs boson become a scientif fact of nature we may need to re-visit them as well.

    Thanks and Regards,

    Vijay Gupta

    Vijay

    "I consider, when we are not certain about the location of object, there is nothing we can know about"

    Any given practical failure in the sensing process, is just that, a failure. The object certainly existed in a definite location as at a specified point, whether we subsequently can identify that or not. Physical existence is not subservient to our sensory capabilities. There was a potential to know, we failed to realise that potential.

    The point here being that when we are all talking about reality, what we are really referring to is knowledge of reality, though we strive, with adherence to due process, etc, to establish the best abstraction we can achieve. Maybe in a million years, if we haven't completely ruined this planet before then, we will be getting close to knowing all there is that we can possibly know (either directly or indirectly).

    Paul

    Dear Mr. Vijay Mohan Gupta

    I thank you for your kind and encouraging response and explanations. Physics is really wonderful and I am enjoying the fqxi discussions to meet and discuss theories and ideas with like-minded people from around the world. Many years ago I saw the work of Prof. Rati Ram Sharma of Chandigarth and he too had proposed a new ether-based physics.

    To include URL in your post click "link help page" under Add New Post below. It will explain the format - but I found that deleting the "http//:" from the link added will insure it works properly. Try it before you post.

    Cheers

    Vladimir

    • [deleted]

    • Post #61

    Hello Paul and Mr Gupta,

    Mr Gupta,

    Well said. But don't forget that the 3D are essential for the respect of all our proportions due to rotations. :)

    Best Regards

    10 days later

    • [deleted]

    • Post #62

    Hi Vijay,

    "Just few comments from a PicoPhysicst.

    1. Preferred system of reference (PSR): Preferred system of reference has always been there and will continue to exist. It is the reference system realtive to which the observer is at rest. In most of our arguments we also believe the observer is at origin that enables use of different co-ordinate systems and easy interpretation of mathematical formulations."

    OK, I'll go along with that.

    "2. Ether was a very different concept so was earth at center of universe."

    The aether is the light bearing aether. That means it incorporates all of the characteristics that light needs to exist. All this other stuff about the sun being the center of the universe is just

    "3. There are many more assumptions that come to mind which are at core of mechanics - whether Newtonian or relativistic. First and foremost of them being the assumption of uniformity of space.

    In the essay 5-Dimensional Universe we describe the universe as 5-dimensional with time dimension mapped in drift direction. This not only provides constancy of speed of light as well as seen as a proof for uniformity of space."

    I'll agree to 4D (3D time); but where is this 5th dimension?

    "Thus time and one of the dimensions (in the drift direction) have conformal mapping and thus measures to same number. The ratio is unity - giving speed of light a character of universal constant.

    If we try to meditate on means available to measure distance and time independently, we will find that is not possible without bringing into picture constancy of speed of light."

    I've noticed that too. What do you think it means?

    Thanks annonymous,

    My view on Ether

    Arguments on ether may begin with carryover of Pre-Newtonian concept of space as extension of matter. Cartesian physics considered everything extended to be corporeal, thus rejecting the idea of empty space. Observation of interference and diffraction of light made some theoretician to relate light with sound. In parallel to this, conservation of energy led to unify kinetic energy, heat, light and sound to be collectively and inter-convertibly called energy.

    As sound can not travel without a medium, it was argued by some theoreticians that a medium is required for light to travel. However, light travels through space devoid of any matter. For space to act as a medium for propagation of light a host of properties shall be assigned to space. Considering the fact the value of these properties are unreasonable and sound does not propagate through space, it was a dead concept at the origin it-self. So ether as an all prevailing medium concept was dead at birth. But as usual, in human nature, we prefer not to be negative in our conversations. This makes different thought processes co-exist in a given period of time. The ether concept continued to exist for some time. The argument in favour of ether was a possibility of providing it a unique characteristic of being at absolute rest. (Though, absolute rest was not defined clearly). In terms of Newtonian frame of reference, it was seen as a universal reference frame that assigns each object a value in each of three dimensions of space representing rate of change of position. This association ether with absolute rest was turned down by Michelson-Morley experiment. This was as big an effort as recent discovery of Higgs-Bosons. The proposed defining characteristic of ether at absolute rest was negated by observations by in 1887 by Albert Michelson and Edward Morley. So ether as a concept similar to a medium that is essential for sound waves died as a result of Michelson-Morley experiment.

    During the time interval between Newton (& Galileo) to Einstein, science was in formative state. From flat earth, to universe with sun as center to doing away with any preferential location or reference was completed in this period. This purified concept of space from all the baggage it carried due to limitations of human intuition and observations.

    In PicoPhysics, we define realities of Knergy and Space as host realities for two opposite concepts. Knergy of Konservation and space is antidote to Konservation. The unary law 'Space contains Knergy' describes the interaction between the two.

    Fifth Dimension of universe

    In PicoPhysics we can establish only three dimensions of space. So space has only three dimensions. There is no fourth or fifth dimension of space. Let us consider what a dimension means. Dimension is one of the observable aspect of reality. The universe includes both Space and Knergy. While Space has 3-Dimensions, Knergy has 2-Dimensions. This gives the universe its five dimensions.

    Science also deals with degrees of freedoms in relation of dimensions. Though universe has five dimensions, the degree of freedom is less than four. The dimension of Time, is maps conformal to space dimension in drift direction. The dimension of energy is less than one, since it does not allow for negative values. Thus degrees of freedom are at best four for universe.

    Thanks & Regards,

    Vijay Gupta

    19 days later

    Vijay

    I agree there is a cut off, probably more on the lines of the Yukawa potential, rather than infinity. My model provides a physical presence and mechanism, coupling and diffraction at the plasma shock, to form boundaries preventing infinite effects. These are kinetic so unite SR and GR via QM. This is all built into the kinetic model in my essay, unfortunately too complex for a cursury read to extract it seems.

    Your essay was original and gave fascinating new viewpoint with some pertinent observations. I note it is languishing and will apply the score boost it deserves. I hope you may also score mine in the same way.

    Best of luck

    Peter

    4 days later

    Thanks Peter,

    I read about Yukawa potential (in Wikipedia) that introduces an exponential decay term that creates a cut off. PicoPhysics has no opinion on the same.

    In view of PicoPhysics (infinite - maths part) a reality that is measured with a number of third infinite order, can not be spanned by another reality that is linear. (This is also the reason for space to have 3-dimensions.)

    This essay may be languishing - since I don't belong to the community organizing this competition. I am thankful to them, for the plate form they provided to me to air my views on nature.

    I am satisfied that I have been able to understand nature based on a single statement 'Space Contains Matter'. 5-Dimensional universe can be seen as a corollary of the same. By the way, in PicoPhysics even the 3-dimensions of space are proved as corollary to unary law 'Space contains matter'. So are manu other concepts that are taken as facts from human intuition are established starting teh logic from Unary law 'Space Contains Matter'.

    (I have re-worded the Unary law from Space Contains Energy' since I wrote this essay).

    Thanks and best regards,

    Vijay Gupta

    17 days later

    • [deleted]

    • Post #66

    Dear Vijay Gupta,

    You,I feel,have tried to explain whole of physics on entirely unknown concepts and descriptions.It,ofcourse,reflects original way of thinking. But,for me,it appears that it would have been nice if you had demonstrated your ideas quatitavely and shown as to how they are related to the existing theories.

    Anyway,wishing you good luck in the essay contest.If you have time go through my essay too (http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1543--Sreenath B N.).

    Best regards,

    Sreenath.

      7 days later

      • [deleted]

      • Post #67

      Vijay Mohan Gupta,

      I would like to see relativists debate some of the content of your essay. I have not found any use for Einstein's, or his supporter's, visual aids. They are not needed to explain or account for relativity type effects nor for deriving the correct equations necessary for properly modeling those effects. Now, that is my opinion. I think though that your approach has more opportunity to draw serious debate. I hope it happens. Your arguments deserve to be evaluated.

      James

        • [deleted]

        • Post #68

        My apologies Vijay. I posted that message in the wrong forum. Please disregard it. I will repost it in Robt Curtis Youngs' forum. I have your essay open and was reading it at this time and ended up posting incorrectly.

        James

        • [deleted]

        • Post #69

        Dear Vijay Mohan Gupta,

        "The most powerful abstraction is found in mathematics - Georg Cantor's set theory. It extended natural numbers to transfinite numbers. With this a rational and logical world is built around numbers as objects in themselves."

        This appears to be a learning opportunity. I see that you proceed to explain it. I look forward to understanding how numbers become objects. :)

        James