Essay Abstract

The spherical model of the earth is 3 dimensional despite general relativity's addition of the fourth dimension (time) and experimental evidence that extra dimensions from other dimensional fields e.g. quantum space and scalar fields impacts on it s topology. The paper therefore wishes to dispel the assumption that the earth or other heavenly body is spherical. It shows that, whereas the surface area, volume, density and mass remain as established, the ultimate shape is actually the result of cumulative flat hyper-planes with tangent vectors extending to infinity. This resolves various physical contradictions relating to a spherical earth. It also supports the theoretical frameworks for existence of extra-dimensional quantum fields just below matter, throughout empty (vacuum space) and outside of space-time. This operational area for quantum waves and universal inflation is not amenable to physical measurement or exploration because its infinite number of singular dimensions ,extents and directions means the dimensions intersect everywhere with no distance between one intersect(field) and another. Thus away from the space-time continuum where speeding matter is superimposed on a finite number of dimensions, there is no space or time. Quantum particles propagate as waves in the scalar field below the universal space-time, creating individual space -time continuums with length: λ. By the same logic, the universal space time continuum is a wave with uneven λ= diameter or longitudinal length of the earth, or other heavenly body. By the principle of equivalence, quantum waves and universal inflation generate electromagnetism and quantum- gravity respectively.

Author Bio

Wanjohi, P.W. did advanced level physics but is a health professional specializing in community health and development .Works with the government and development partners. As a freelance physicist, he is a published researcher. His wish is top see a public well knowledgeable of their physical, biological and chemical environments.

Download Essay PDF File

  • [deleted]

  • Post #2

Peter:

A strange, but interesting approach to sphericity. I strongly feel that "space" must first be defined independently as to what we are referring to. The tetrahedron is the simplest extreme while the sphere is the opposite. Cojoining these, with the former as "energy" and the latter as "mass" unveils a model for simultaneous growth as detailed in my end notes.

Perhaps you may look at it?

Point of essay (vote high!, thanks) is based on

(1) Light "energy" seeks surface area of mass that mediates charge motions while

(2) Gravity is a content of mass phenomena that seeks time to exist by growth.

To Seek Unknown Shores

聽聽 http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1409

    Ted Erikson:

    Thanks for encouragement.However,because energy=mass*C your position and mine are not different.I hope you agree that something needs to be done about the 3.D sphere model of earth because reality as we know it now is not 3-D!

    I'd read your essay before writing mine. It is very informative .

    a month later

    • [deleted]

    • Post #4

    Dear Peter Wamai Wanjohi,

    I wanted to let you know that I have taken a look at your essay but have not yet read it all thoroughly. You are considering an interesting conundrum about the dimensions that the Earth actually occupies. The problems you identify with a spherical Earth I must admit I have not previously considered. My visualisation of your idea of fish swimming in a straight line end exiting the ocean did amuse me, though you are making a serious point. I really like that you have included lots of diagrams to illustrate your arguments. I notice in your reply to Ted you mention reality. I have been working on an explanatory framework that allows the space-time mathematics to co-exists with a higher dimensional quantum physics model without contradiction. There is a high res. version of diagram 1. in my essay discussion thread. Would be great if you get the opportunity to take a look. Kind regards Georgina

      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

        • [deleted]

        • Post #6

        Very true. It is apparent the community ratings here are a function of the number of people who rate an essay and the points they give.This is too subjective or arbitrary.What to do,is there a more scientific way? Hope it is not the only criteria used by the reviewing panel to judge entries.

        Am looking at your entry hoping to give my most objective rating (feedback) .All the best.

        • [deleted]

        • Post #7

        Thanks for your remarks.Having read your essay, i think our ideas converge in some critical areas.What i learn from your essay is the idea of external and internal reality (objective and subjective objects). Though it is known that photons carry information about objects across the universe, and that the said information represent the real objects and is not objective by itself,you state that even the things we can touch or eat are themselves not real but represent another reality.I think QM is of the same opinion (that reality is a collapse of probability waves upon being observed).

        It is also ties with your other expression that reality is data spread over the surface of spherical shells that get larger with each iteration/moment of universal inflation.I cannot agree more because in my own thinking space-time continuum is a concentric shell that contains all there is.GR then informs us that the space -time is warped all over by material objects.In this way,smaller objects gravitates downwards towards bigger ones along the curvatures.

        Write a Reply...