An Artist\'s Modest Proposal by Kenneth Snelson

Dear Kenneth,

Vladimir Tamari was kind enough to mention your artistry over on my thread, so I came over to see what he meant. I have no idea how long it took you to create this, but it was well worth it!

By the way, I agree with the notion that physics ought to be based on simple physical principles (I like to describe things as much as possible in terms of cause and effect). However, I have found that choosing the physical principles to be simple rather than choosing the mathematics to be convenient can result in some very complicated mathematics! I noted the discussion in your thread above about trying to precisely quantify your model, and it looks to me as if the math involved might be a bit steep. No matter, though; the math ought to be whatever it has to be to get the job done.

On a lighter note, if a picture really is worth a thousand words, then I'm afraid you've exceeded the length limit for the contest! Take care,

Ben Dribus

Hi Kenneth,

What a surprise to see you authoring an article in this contest. I have known and admired your sculptures for many years and was delighted to see that you, like me, take our artistic/visual talents and our interest in science to deal with questioning the foundations of modern science. I have an article in this contest you might want to check out. It's brief and easy reading. I haven't been able to read and comment on many of the entered essays because I've been busy promoting my just released debut novel, The Reluctant Hunter, which tells the odyssey of a young aspiring architect with an interest in cosmology who is caught up in the Bosnian War. It has five stars on Amazon and Barnes and Noble and was voted Editor's Choice by my publisher.

But I was so excited to see your name here that I had to write even before I read your article. I will go there now. You've been one of my heroes -- your sculptures are exquisite.

Joel Levinson joellevinsonauthor.com At this website you'll see articles I've written on architecture and other subjects.

Dear Kenneth thank you so much for your kind words. It is great that you are getting so many visitors to this page who offer support and understanding of your atomic model. Your clear uncluttered model is the result of deep thought about structure and the forces that keep various components in tensegretistic balance (to coin an adjective from your noun !). This has served you well in the conviction that the atom is no different than any other structure.

Bravo for ignoring the negativity of the probabilistic Copenhagen interpretation towards physical reality. That took some strength of mind. On the other hand non-academic researchers like you and me have the advantage that we can go on a limb and present our ideas without worrying that it will cost us a University position, and the like.

The visual approach is more important than other kinds of math (geometry might be considered a visual discipline) because Nature has structure in 3D. This we believe.

Avanti!

Vladimir

Dear Kenneth,

Thank you for a very thought provoking essay with a welcome conclusion.

When being a student I was taught Bohr early model and subsequent atomic models based in Schrödinger quantum mechanics. The models left many question without answer and the teacher most common recommendation was "don't ask". In my essay, I criticize some aspects of quantum mechanics, which are often assumed but which are not valid.

In recent years, I have been approaching more and more to Bohm and DeBroglie ideas. Up to the point of develop my own formulation/interpretation of quantum mechanics, which I present in my FQXi forum (1356) and available here Positive Definite Phase Space Quantum Mechanics. I obtain a correction to the classical Hamiltonian which shares many properties with Bohm potential.

One interesting aspect of this correction term is that it can be splinted into two components: the electronic density, its Laplacian and its gradient. When we represent the density for an isolated atom we a scientific representation (see attached fig. density1) that resemble figures such as your 2 (of course yours is much more beatiful, what I provide below is raw black and white).

I think that you will find very interesting how spherical symmetry of isolated atoms is lost in molecules due to perturbations from the other atoms. For instance, the scientific representation (see attached density2) for ethene molecule reflects the inner spherical symmetry near nuclei and the highly non-spherical 'valence' shell.

RegardsAttachment #1: density1.gifAttachment #2: density2.gif

Mr Kenneth Snelson

It was a pleasant surprise to read your article. Your quest for understanding the working (relative stable atomic structure) is exemplary. As you have properly put the question & result of Solvay Conferences of 1927 and 1930 in perspective in these words ' "real" atom models versus abstract non-visual mathematics in favour of Niels Bohr and his Copenhagen world view. However, when I was introduced to atomic structure, it was through the Bohr's model for hydrogen atom.

I will try to put across view of PicoPhysics on working of atoms. Now since it is far away from basic concepts of Konservation as enunciated in my essay on 5-dimensional universe, it may not be very clear. Nevertheless here it is.

When we develop the unary law 'Space Contains Knergy', we arrive at some basic dynamics in nature. The logic sequence & this dynamics are highlighted below;

1. For Konservation the reality is required to be measured to a finite multiple of unit of measure

2. Requirement of finite measure makes it obligatory for a natural unit of measure to exist for Konserved reality (Knergy)

3. Natural unit of measure means it can not observed (or measured) as a fraction of this unit. Thus quantization in nature is built around Konservation.

4. Since Space is not Konserved, It is defined by unary law 'Space contains Knergy' to measure to third exponential order.

5. Space has three dimensions (Space of Unary law is hence identified with Euclidean space).

6. Unary law 'Space Contains Knergy' now provides first simple model of universe as isolated existence of identities (composed of Knergy & occupied space) separated from each other by intervening space.

7. Now a static model of universe will mean that space itself is divided into two parts - one that possess Knergy, and the other that don't possess Knergy. This is negated and negation is considered part of word 'Contain' in the Unary law. Thus unary law enunciate a dynamic universe. Additionally the unary law defines the two physical realties 'Space' and 'Knergy'. Thus we can not divide space into two realities.

8. Now all of space shall have a possibility to posses Knergy.

9. This requirement lead us to three basic process leading to dynamics in the universe;

a. Distribution - variation of Knergy density (represent able by real number)

b. Consumption - Consumption of space by Knergy

c. Creation - Creation of space

10. Other static and pseudo static models were considered and rejected as not compatible with Unary law. Improvement on this model is feasible.

11. The dynamic model of universe now leads us directly to concept of instants, traceability, time interval and invariance of speed of light. This is also origin for my essay on 5-dimensional universe with time axis mapped on one of the three Euclidean space dimensions (observed as direction of motion of Knergy).

12. Now since space is not Konserved while Knergy is, presence of Knergy in space, binds the occupied space.

13. I will now jump directly to model of atom skipping the formation, explanation and description of charges and electromagnetic effects, and check where we land

a. The field between +ive charge and -ive charge is composed of Knergy

b. The contents of the same can be integral multiple of natural unit of Knergy (Please note Knergy density and contemporary field strength are proportional).

c. The stability islands are provided by integral multiple of Knergy in field between electron and nucleus with minimal penetration of Knergy unit into nucleus.

d. You may note that field strength looses inverse square proportionality near nucleus due to factors such as rate of consumption of space in the nucleus (mass) as well as matter density at nucleus surface. The space density is higher near Knergy concentrations.

14. Important Notes:

a. In contemporary physics, the stability is attained in multi-particle system by forces acting between particles and reaction there-of. In PicoPhysics the stability is balance between Konservation (Knergy) and relaxation time of object and surrounding space.

b. PicoPhysics establishes interaction between Space and Knergy follows law of refraction (Snell's law). It thus establishes Refraction as the unary interaction - all other interactions are built-on of this interaction.

c. Knergy and Matter are synonymous.

Thus in PicoPhysics natural quantization of Knergy results into Nuclear and atomic properties of Matter. I understand that it is difficult to agree or comment on above text. But I have taken the opportunity to put-in the above to record some of the results of essay on 5-Dimensional Universe.

Please accept my gratitude for the enlightening essay.

Thanks & Best Regards,

Vijay Gupta

Proponent - Unary law

Mr Kenneth Snelson

SORRY THE ABOVE MESSAGE GOT REGISTERED AS ANNONYMOUS.

ACTUALLY I GOT LOGGED OUT BY THE TIME I FINISHED COMPOSING THE TEXT.

Please accept my gratitude for the enlightening essay.

Thanks & Best Regards,

Vijay Gupta

Proponent - Unary law

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.

Sergey Fedosin

Mr. Snelson,

I very much admire your work. I always had a thing for art, geometry and physics, and your work beautifully reflects it all.

I too have a visual approach to physics, but what I found lately is that placing it all in 4D (all spatial dimensions), dispels paradoxes and explains things from small to large. Thus I have a hunch that your ideas can find mathematical expression in 4 dimensions, not 3 ( time, of course, there is never escaping it :). Regardless of what you may think of my essay ( http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1547 ), I think you will enjoy the 4D geometry and find the projections of 4D objects onto 3D fascinating in your work.

Dear Kenneth Snelson,

If we want to consider classical atomic models, we need to remember that electron has also very strong dipole magnetic moment - is tiny magnet. Placing reference frame in the electron, proton travels in this magnetic field - there appears Lorentz force which is far non-negligible: it makes circular orbits unstable. Such classical electron would like to fall to proton, but the Lorentz force bends the trajectory so finally it misses the proton and return to the initial distance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-fall_atomic_model