THE CLOUD OF UNKNOWING & THE ITSY QUBITSY UNIVERSE by Vladimir F. Tamari

Dear Ken,

Thank you for your very interesting, kind, and encouraging message.

I have long admired your magnetic top 'gear trains' with which you made physical, conceptual and computer-simulated models of the electrons whirling around an atom. The concept is so utterly beautiful (readers can see the attached figure of your gears), and I have acknowledged its importance and that of your Tensegrity principle in my 2005 Beautiful Universe Theory BU also found here I encourage readers to read about your Artist's Model Proposal of the Atom. Also on your fascinating www.kennethsnelson.net website. It is only by the way that I mention your being one of the greatest sculptors of the 20th c. !

You once told me that physicists of the Feynman school of thought discouraged your forays into physics and told you 'nature does not work that way'. That is so very wrong. Feynman was too practical and too busy designing the atom bomb and his Quantum Electrodynamics theory to try too hard to 'understand' Quantum Mechanics the way we and many others want to understand it: as a physically realistic phenomena that can be understood by physical models.

Unfortunately and ironically, I firmly believe that it was Einstein himself (despite his protestations about God playing dice and spooky interactions at a distance) who was mainly responsible for this state of affairs. The duality he introduced in his point photon concept eventually lead to probability being accepted as the physical basis of QM. In his Special Relativity Einstein made c constant and brilliantly deleted the ether, an unnecessary move that has lead to a dead end blocking quantum gravity progress.

Back to our gears. In your atom their edges behave as if they are linked together by actual teeth - there is no slippage which works well there. In my BU 'slippage' is also allowed and is in fact necessary to explain phenomena like light bending in a gravitational field. A BU gear affects the next gear less and less the more the next gear is spinning. Were it not so light speed would become infinite because a local motion is instantly linked to the furthest 'gear' in the Universe. What a pity Maxwell's ether gear model was put aside as a sort of conceptual outdated toy: it contained a very important physical truth in it.

Again thank you. I feel that your views will soon be triumphantly vindicated.

VladimirAttachment #1: Snelson_gears.jpg

Dear Kyle

Thank you for your kind words - it helped that I am an artist and designer !

While maths is essential in physics, I feel it could also lead one astray because all sorts of different math can describe the same situation. I feel that realistic physics true to nature should be visualizable as a physical model or figure.

Other essays had very nice illustrations - for example the one by Stanislav Smirnov.

Now that you mention it - I did say in the abstract that informational content is the same as IT at the smallest scales. I should have said that at those scales the concept of information becomes meaningless - there is only IT=Qubit a hypothetial building block in my theory. The information channel has zero length. It is only at the macro scale that we can read any information embedded in Nature.

Maths can be misleading..words too!

Vladimir

Dear Eckard - I have now responded to your interested paper on your page. I quote my rather hasty comments to your numbered endnotes and suggestions as follows:

1) ...there is no common time but different local times. Suggestion 1: Negative values of d or t, respectively...

VT-By requiring that all observers see things in the same way Einstein made simultaneous time impossible. If you dispense with this requirement and assume absolute time...in fact NO time, a universal state can be dealt with all over the Universe.

2) Infinitely long rigid bodies (coordinate systems) ...Suggestion 2: As already Leibniz understood for numbers, one may arbitrarily choose only one measure

VT--Well not only infinitely long, but if you take a given reference frame and make it expand to fill the entire Universe you have absolute space! In my Beautiful Universe Theory also found here I have found that there is no necessity to start with Special Relativity - why distort apace and time unnecessarily if Lorentz transformations in an absolute Universe suffice?

3) Michelson's experiment ...Lorentz, merely managed to rescue the ether hypothesis in a rather mysterious manner. Length contraction has never been directly observed. Suggestion 3: The velocity of light c equals to the distance d between the position of emitter at the moment of emission and the position of receiver at the moment of detection divided by the time of flight t: c=d/t.

VT-- I have yet to prove it, but in relation to the above theory I thought a lot and concluded that relativity 'works' in a discrete ether lattice where light speed c is a maximum but can be less if the local density increases (for example due to gravity).

4) Poincaré's method of synchronization uses a signal that is emitted from A and then reflected from B back to A. While this method is correct on condition the distance between A and B does not change, it otherwise destroys symmetry and synchrony between A and B.

Suggestion 4: Synchronization can be performed by means of clock transport. If the ABA method is preferred then the change of the distance during measurement must be known for calculating a compensation of its influence.

VT--In both cases it is clock time that changes, not time itself as a dimension. And if a meter is flown its length changes not space itself as a dimension. Spacetime in SR is an unnecessary formulation that 'works' for the wrong reason (that c is constant).

Vladimir

Dear Yuri - more importantly I also read it!!

Good luck

Vladimir

Dear Jonathan - thanks. I rated your wonderful essay on July 6 and rated it immediately. Good luck to you. May we meet on fqxi 2014 !

Vladimir

Dear Peter and Jonathan

Thanks for alerting me to my essay making it to the finalists yaaaay! - I was not aware of it - considering the last-minute ups and downs in the ratings. And congratulations for you too achieving your peer's highest estimation (including mine of course). I was wondering how many of these 4.3 and/or other essays are by fqXi members - those that will be automatically shunted in as explained by Brendan at the outset? With the best of luck and regards!

Vladimir

Hi Dr. Ojocv vvvvvvvv

Oops sorry my grandson has added his contribution. Appreciation and congratulations for your excellent essay making it past the penultimate hurdle.

With best regards

Vladimir