I read his essay and rate it
His essay is a mental prospecting physical sense of the information. I agree with the main points of their development, but for me it is also necessary to translate these ideas into equations correctly describe physical phenomena directly or indirectly observable.
Must always, in any discipline, a deductive-inductive logical analysis, complemented by a physico-mathematical scheme. I wish you the best of luck in the contest. thank you very much for your comment
Hello Angel,
I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.
Regards and good luck in the contest,
Sreenath BN.
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827
Dear Angel,
Thanks for your gracious comments on my essay and I am going post my comments on your essay in your thread shortly.
Best wishes,
Sreenath
Dear Angel,
It seems that only a few authors wrote about your ambitious essay. It attracts me a lot and I will spend time trying to understand. I wrote a few papers on E8 and quantum information and among them
1. arXiv:0906.1063 [pdf, ps, other]
Three-qubit entangled embeddings of CPT and Dirac groups within E8 Weyl group
2. arXiv:0904.3691 [pdf, ps, other]
Clifford group dipoles and the enactment of Weyl/Coxeter group W(E8) by entangling gates
3. arXiv:1002.4287 [pdf, ps, other]
Entangling gates in even Euclidean lattices such as the Leech lattice
But I would like you to read my present essay and rate it if you wish.
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1789
Best wishes,
Michel
I left a comment on his excellent essay, which I want to read further.
Also will study his works, you mentioned, in arxiv.
You analyze mainly the relationship, which undoubtedly exists between groups of symmetry, the geometric topology and the quantification of information.
This is the right path to that sooner than later the physicists will have to take if they want to reach a unified theory, even partially.
that should not be forgotten, that it is possible to reach a limit in the acquisition of knowledge, or quantity of information algorithmic computable form, using equations solvable. This is demonstrated, for example, with no computable number, omega, Chaitin.
The space-time-mass has to be quantified, not crossable with lower limits. Only in this way avoids the singularity of black holes, which is not limited due to quantum theoretically, the general theory of relativity.
This same problem is in the ad hoc method: the renormalization of the infinite.
With the quantification, with limits proportional to the Planck mass, Planck length and Planck time, it would avoid the infinite.
As I show in my paper this year, a mathematical theory very basic string already exists in the foundations of quantum theory, I am referring to a string vibrating in a box, which as you know well it responds to the equation:
[math]P=\sin^{2}(2\pi/l)(2/l)
[/math]
The modifications that should be made to this equation are that the factor 2 represents the maximum fluctuation, and the length should be replaced by a dimensionless length, as the ratio between the length d dimensional, relative to the Planck length.
In the case of the Higgs boson equation reduces to:
[math]P(2,l_{7})=\sin^{2}(2\pi/l_{7})(2/l_{7})\cdot246.221202\: Gev=126.177\: Gev=m_{h}
[/math]
Where L7 is the dimensionless ratio lenght Placnk in seven dimensions to Planck lenght, that is:
[math]l_{7}=([2\cdot(2\pi)^{7}]/[(16\pi^{3})/15])^{1/9}
[/math]
In short: the simplest compactification in circles; Kaluza-Klein type
At present, I am studying a demonstration of the Riemann hypothesis. Before publishing it, I want to make, reviewing it intensely.
Humbly, is a demonstration of a beautiful simplicity, which is why I doubt that is correct, despite the fact that, after repeating all steps not find any errors.
I'm working on a reformulation of demonstration, basing on the following property that only has the square root, and why the Riemann zeta function can be expressed by the following differential equation:
[math]\zeta(s)=(-1)^{x-1}\cdot[\cos\{-t\cdot\int2df(x)/f(x)\}\cdot2df(x)+i\cdot\sin\{-t\cdot\int2df(x)/f(x)\}\cdot2df(x)]
[/math]
[math]f(x)=\sqrt{x}\:\: s=1/2\;+it
[/math]
Regards
Hello Angel
Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech
(http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html)
said: "It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the relationship. And example of this is the Schrodinger equation and the Heisenberg formulation of quantum mechanics. I don't know why that is - it remains a mystery, but it was something I learned from experience. There is always another way to say the same thing that doesn't look at all like the way you said it before. I don't know what the reason for this is. I think it is somehow a representation of the simplicity of nature."
I too believe in the simplicity of nature, and I am glad that Richard Feynman, a Nobel-winning famous physicist, also believe in the same thing I do, but I had come to my belief long before I knew about that particular statement.
The belief that "Nature is simple" is however being expressed differently in my essay "Analogical Engine" linked to http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1865 .
Specifically though, I said "Planck constant is the Mother of All Dualities" and I put it schematically as: wave-particle ~ quantum-classical ~ gene-protein ~ analogy- reasoning ~ linear-nonlinear ~ connected-notconnected ~ computable-notcomputable ~ mind-body ~ Bit-It ~ variation-selection ~ freedom-determinism ... and so on.
Taken two at a time, it can be read as "what quantum is to classical" is similar to (~) "what wave is to particle." You can choose any two from among the multitudes that can be found in our discourses.
I could have put Schrodinger wave ontology-Heisenberg particle ontology duality in the list had it comes to my mind!
Since "Nature is Analogical", we are free to probe nature in so many different ways. And each of us surely must have touched some corners of it.
Good luck and good cheers!
Than Tin
Dear Angel,
Thank you for your interest. I agree that the tetrahedron may be a basic piece of
an unification model. I suspect that Klein's theory of invariants is related to your calculations. For the tetrahedron, the Belyi function is the cube of the ratio between the two invariants as given in Klein's book about the icosahedron (Dover, 1956, [5], p. 104). But we can discuss this by email when the competition ends. The tetrahedron may be seen as the 3-simplex, it can be driven in 6 distinct ways by a dessin d'enfant arising from the cartographic group (as I answer above to Stephen Anastasi), I wonder if one can attach some physical significance to these facts.
In what regards your essay, I find it extremely attractive because you are producing numbers that seem to correspond to mass ration in particle physics.
It would have to be organized in a more academic style but I don't worry at this stage. Your essay is also relevant to the topic of observer participancy. You know the sentence requoted in Wikipedia article about Preintuitionism
In fact Kronecker might be the most famous of the Pre-Intuitionists for his singular and often quoted phrase, "God made the natural numbers; all else is the work of man."
I am a fan of number theory and produced several papers on this topic.
I give you an extremely high rate to promote your research. I would like to understand the details of your calculations. My email is
michel.planat@femto-st.fr
Good luck,
Michel
Angel,
This is fantastic. I also have in mind that RH is basic for physics.
Tis paper may be of interest to you.
arXiv:1012.4665 [pdf, ps, other]
Riemann hypothesis and Quantum Mechanics
I will now study your calculations in detail.
Good luck for your research.
Michel
Missing the summation, apologies
[math]{\displaystyle \sum_{x=1}^{\infty}(-1)^{x-1}[\cos(-t\cdot\int2df(x)/f(x))}\cdot df(x)+i\sin(-t\cdot\int2df(x)/f(x))\cdot df(x)]=\zeta(s)
[/math]
Right now I'm with a lot of work
I read paper on the RH conjecture. very good
The connection of the Hamiltonian with temperature states
From what I know of the Riemann conjecture, you may want, we may already know, the following equation that meet the real part imaginary number, 1/2 + it
[math]\zeta(s)=0\;;\: s=1/2\:+it_{n}\;;\:2\pi n\simeq t_{n}\cdot\ln(t_{n}/2\pi e)
[/math]
I'd love to share with you scientific knowledge, ideas, because our views on mathematical physics are very similar.
No doubt that I will contact you via your email.
Leave some time, at the moment I have a bit complicated life. But hopefully by the end of September, I'll be more liberated.
However, if you want you can send as it deems appropriate to this email address: angel1056510@gmail.com
Thank you very much (do not forget to give it a 10 to his essay.'m Having problems voting. Already have contacted administrators. If you do too, perhaps accelerate this problem)
Now he will comment soon, on other aspects of your last post, on the symmetry of the tetrahedron and their fundamental role in the physical, as well as the utmost importance of number theory in physics, since it is the queen of mathematics .
regards
Dear Angel,
You have written an exemplary essay in which you have clearly said why It and Bit have equal importance in the world we observe. Your knowledge of both relativistic and quantum physics is amazing and your handling of the sort of mathematics involved in treating the above two fields of physics on the same basis is revealing and showing your profound knowledge in it. It is important to note that you have given 'objective' existence to 'information' in the quantum world much against the Copenhagen interpretation of QM. The connections of quantum information to cosmological problems is quite worthy of consideration. The distinction of particle states in to ordinary and imaginary states is noticeable. Based on these observations you have predicted three dark matter candidates whose existence is to be confirmed experimentally.
In the 4th section of your essay, you have said under exponential inflation, "the infinitesimal change of acceleration is equal to the infinitesimal change of speed" reminds me of my article published in journal Astrophysics and Space Science (ASTR)- ASTR-D-12-03832R2 of may issue 2013, titled "Is there Lower Limit to Velocity or Velocity Change?", along with my colleagues. If you have time, please, go through it.
Thank you very much for producing such an enthralling article and I am going to rate it accordingly with maximum honors.
Sincerely,
Sreenath
Thank you very much for your critical analysis of my essay. I see you have understood perfectly, no doubt because of its excellent physical-mathematical knowledge.
The five states with imaginary mass, clearly demonstrate that they are fully implicit solutions in factoring, the square of the total energy. And therefore their existence is required.
You know that negative energy states (imaginary mass) are used consistently in the renormalization of QM calculations.
Indeed: the Copenhagen interpretation of QM is not entirely correct; regarding possible no knowledge of quantum states that are not measured or observed.
This is very easy to demonstrate: 1) the cosmological parameters that evolved over time until now existed for themselves regardless of their existence observers (which did not exist at the beginning of the universe), or not.
And since, that these parameters (dark energy density of baryons, etc, etc) are derived from quantum states, the Copenhagen interpretation is not correct.
Precisely imaginary states are the key to understanding the probabilistic knowledge of QM, since these states are not observable, but if they influence the outcome of the observation.
A clear example is the effect Cassimir. As you know, the virtual particles can go at speeds faster than light. Likewise, the tunnel effect involves speeds exceeding the speed of light. This does not contradict the theory of SR, since it can be generalized, as recently did a couple of mathematicians, to include speeds exceeding that of light
Speeds above that of light appear in the cosmological imflaccion, the RG (beyond the edge of the observable universe, allows higher speeds ac RG)
The speeds exceeding that of light are explained perfectly as shortest paths THROUGH extra dimensions; compacted in circles. This month work and Sussukind Maldacena, show how the existence of black holes linked by Einstein-Rosen bridges; describe a spatiotemporal throat, that graphically, is equivalent to rip a three-dimensional torus, on the axis of the outer circle of the torus compact. The speeds exceeding that of light are explained perfectly as shortest paths THROUGH extra dimensions; compacted in circles. This month work and Sussukind Maldacena, show how the existence of black holes linked by Einstein-Rosen bridges; describe a spatiotemporal throat, that graphically, is equivalent to rip a three-dimensional torus, on the axis of the outer circle of the bull compacted.
I would like to study his work that I mentioned, but I'm not subscribed to this magazine.
If you want, you can send it to me at my email address, I would appreciate. angel1056510@gmail.com
Thanks very much
Regards
.
Hello Angel,
I don't like too much equations but your work looks interesting.
Regards,
Akinbo
I appreciate your comments. For my physics without equations that are in agreement with the physical phenomenology, is reduced to mere philosophy. But the analysis and essays on different fields of the same, they are equally necessary and healthy.
This equation so beautiful I think you will love.
the sum of the squares of all prime numbers less than or equal to 137. 137 is the integer part of the inverse of the fine structure constant:
SUM_p
SUM( p^2 )
[math]\sum_{p\leq137}p^{2}=174764
[/math]
[math](\sum_{p\leq137}p^{2})+m_{\tau}/m_{e}\:+m_{\mu}/m_{e}\:+m_{e}/m_{e}\:-(\sqrt{\pi}-1)=m_{Z}/m_{e}
[/math]
[math](4\pi/3)-\ln\ln(\varphi)+1/(\sum_{p\leq137}p^{2}=174764)=\ln(\alpha^{-1})
[/math]
[math]\alpha^{-1}=137.035999073\;;\;\varphi=Golden\: number
[/math]
Thanks very much and good essay for you
Regards
Dear Angel,
Its my pleasure to read your essay at least in this phase of the contest. I can specially appreciate you for your last sentences which are also carried the meaning of last sentences in my essay.
Your last words are:
"Thus It from Bit = Bit from It. Different sides of the same coin."
My last words: "Therefore, 'it from bit' and 'bit from it' is just a depiction of the same digital nature on a mirror."
Most probably at deeper level we are mutually focus on the same perceptions.
Can we mutually rate our views in the contest?
with my best regards
Dipak
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1855
mail: dipakbhunia08@yahoo.com
Dear Angel,
Fantastic essay! I do share your acknowledgements: " to God Almighty for letting me know of its wonders." In KQID, I am grateful to our Ancestor FAPAMA Qbit, our Creator and Distributor. Except that KQID says that Qbit is all things and all things are Qbit. Thus, we are that Qbit in action in our limited form but we are capable of comprehending the mystery of infinite Existence. I share Enistein amazement of our ability to comprehend something that is beyond of our comprehension.
Yes, I agree with your statement below:
"The information or knowledge we can get from a quantum state, depends on the interaction of this state with the measurement process itself. As we know, this involves an uncertainty in the amount of information and accuracy of this knowledge. Now we ask: is there an information content intrinsic and independent of the observer, in quantum reality? Our answer is a resounding, yes. More precisely, we show that this information is encoded on surfaces, and specifically in circular compactifications. That is, there is a holograph on surfaces. In this encoding of quantum information will call as the strong holographic principle. "
If I may briefly introduce KQID to you. First, KQID Qbit is (00,1,-1) which is singularity Qbit Multiverse in zeroth dimension at absolute zero temperature that computes and projects Einstein complex coordinates (Pythagoras complex triangles or Fu Xi's gua or Fibonacci numbers!) onto the 2D Minkowski Null geodesic and then instantaneously into the 3D in Lm, our Multiverse timeline to allows Existence to move around 360 degree and its arrows of time as you described below. New informations are created and distributed per 10^-1000 seconds. No information is ever deleted. See my essay Child of Qbit in time. I will rate your essay superb and hope you can do the same. Now my ranking is under the water. Hope you can help, if and only if, you think my essay should be ranked higher. KQID is the only theory out there that can calculate the dark energy of our Multiverse ≤10^-153Pm/Pv and the minimum bits as the lower bound ≥ 10^153 bits in our Multiverse. KQID is the only theory that I knows here that proves bit = it, and KQID calculates Sun lights into Sun bits; calculates electron, proton and neutron in terms of bits; set up equivalent principle of bits with energy and matter. Therefore, Wheeler's it from bit and bit from it. Correct me if I am wrong. Furthermore, KQID is the only theory in this universe has the mechanism on how Holographic Principle works. Also answer the mother of all questions, the why, how and what Existence.
Pythagoras famously summarized: "All things are numbers." KQID rephrase it that all thing are one Qbit: Qbit is all things and all things are Qbit. Thus, Wheeler's it from bit and bit from it because bit = it.
You have a sophisticated and creative piece of work.
Best wishes,
Leo KoGuan
Thanks very much for your comments
Your essay is very imaginative, but I need read more times to understand in greater depth. I have evaluated your essay.
Regards and best of luck in the contest, dear Leo.
Hi Angel,
Thank you for your model and the detailed calculations. When I have time after the contest I hope to go over your calculations carefully, because I find the model might fit nicely with my own, which also relies on hypernumbers.
I had a question about section 3.0.3: here you offer three formulas which result in slightly different values for the fine structure constant. Are you saying they each have a physical meaning, and if so, why do the values differ?
In my essay Software Cosmos I endorse the use of quaternions and Geometric Algebra as a way to link computational models and physics. I find that the S3 hypersphere has several important roles, from QM up to the structure of the cosmos as a whole. I hope you get a chance to take a look and let me know what you think!
Hugh
dear Hugh: If you observe the three formulas that give to the fine structure constant, two of which depend on the masses of tau, muon and electron (one as a function of a sum of the electric charges)
This simply means that due to the unification of all forces, this unification is manifested so that, for example, this constant is expressible by different equations. The physical meaning is the same, this represents a probability that an electron emits or absorbs a photon. But it also means, the inverse of this constant maximum number of photons or electrons by breaking the vacuum by the group E8
As there will only vary the values observed in the ninth decimal, ie: (alpha) ^ -1 = 137.03599907 ...
You Rate your essay, which I liked the explanation of the sphere S3 and their properties. Just a few post above, right here, take the inverse of the fine structure constant factor as a function of the sphere volume in 3d: (4Pi) / 3
(4Pi)/3 -InIn(Phi) + (1/SUM(square all prime numbers minor or equal to 137))= In( alpha^-1)
4Pi)/3 -InIn(Phi) + 1/(174764) = In( 137.035999073 )
Also, this very successful at the mention of the fractality of space-time in you essay
In relation to this fractality I put an equation giving the inverse of the fine structure constant as a function of the fractal dimension of spacetime (Phi) ^ 3; Phi is the golden number.
[ (163/6) + [{[ ( [2(Phi)^3]-7 )^4 /7] + 21=SO(7)} ]/6 -3] ]^-1 +137 = 137.035999073
Regards
and the best of luck for your interesting essay
