All,

I'll be reading the last few essays which I haven't yet commented on over the next two days. If I happened to have missed yours or missed a reply, please let me know and I'll be glad to discuss further.

Best wishes,

Antony

Hello Sridattadev,

Thanks for sharing. I'll take a look at the video.

All the best for your writing,

Antony

Hi Antony,

Just playing the devil's advocate: you say that a set with negative dimensionality indeed sounds crazy, but that this is what makes your idea more fundamental. But a mathematician would answer: no, this is what makes your idea wrong, as no such negative dimensionality exists in mathematics.

That is to say: can you give a definition of the dimensionality of a set, such that this can be negative?

Best regards,

Marcoen

Hi Antony,

Yours was certainly an original approach, and I like the possibility that the Fibonacci sequence is more fundamental than we suppose, but I am not sure I understand everything you describe. You wrote:

> However, any information that passes beyond an event horizon becomes empirically lost.

Essayist Christian Corda claims that it may not be lost. You may want to look at his argument.

> The only direction where information can be both received and revealed is 2-dimensionally across this 2-dimensional horizon.

It is not clear to me whether this is possible either. I thought time appears "frozen" at the event horizon to observers falling in.

> The final part -3-dimensions, again conserves dimensionality by giving the Universe outside the Black Hole information, confirming that a bit of 3-dimensional space has fallen in, so the Universe gets -3 back out.

You stated in your abstract that information falling in becomes "empirically lost". What do you mean here by "giving the Universe outside the Black Hole information"? Is the information the fact that a bit has fallen in rather than the value of the bit?

Your concept of "dimensional conservation" is interesting. Do you mean that the dimensions that a particle can send or receive information (summed over all particles) is conserved?

In my Software Cosmos essay I do not refer to the Fibonacci sequence. But I can see how it could be involved in an architectural layer below the outer physical layer. This layer would be responsible for Life, music, and aesthetics generally. Contrary to the usual assumptions, I think the material could emerge from it rather than the other way around.

Hugh

    Hi Hugh,

    Thanks for reading and your comments. Great questions.

    I've looked at Christian's essay and he has looked at mine. We agree with regard to information loss, in that I suggest it seems lost, but actually continue to conclude it isn't. It must always be released even if that takes an seemingly infinite amount of time to an outside observer.

    At the event horizon, time moves normally to anyone at that same "altitude". Only seems frozen to an outside observer. I'm considering information exchange AT the horizon.

    The -3 is the bit that an it has fallen in AND the value of that it. Hence dimensionality is balanced between the inside and outside of the Black Hole.

    Dimensional conservation is indeed about the number of dimensions information can be exchanged in the Universe as a whole, yes.

    Your Software Cosmos does certainly sound interesting. I've read it and thought I'd commented, but I'll double check. I'm open to both it and bit being more fundamental, as I currently consider both somewhat equally important, but different.

    Best wishes & thanks again for you excellent questions,

    Antony

    Hi Marcoen,

    Thanks for taking the time to discuss, I'm enjoying it, abd it helps clarify the theory.

    It is good to play devil's advocate, but I don't consider it wrong, just a new idea, which is what the contest is about.

    The negative part comes from the Fibonacci sequence. All positive numbers also have negative square roots, but are generally ignored. Even square root of -2 is a mathematical concept.

    But what I meant by more fundamental, is that it is a quantum like aspect, in that we consider both the positive AND negative dimensionality.

    Also negative in the case of dimensionality here spells out time direction, in that for objects to fall out of a Black Hole, time would have to travel backwards, I.e. a white hole. This should not be confused with normal time s Hawking Radiation.

    Another way to look at negative dimensionality is to imagine what happens when we lose positive dimensionality from the Universe to a Black Hole. The BH gains it as some +ve, while the Universe outside loses it as -ve. So we can even simply imagine it as keeping balance of accounts.

    But I'd suggest that inside the Black Hole the negative is more real.

    Take Hawking Radiation for example, to emit mass, negative virtual mass pops into existence within the BH. Again, like my dimensionality, a "crazy" concept.

    Glad you made this point.

    Many thanks & best wishes,

    Antony

    Indeed, there seems to be a lot of evidence in nature for your theory.

    Antony

    Hi Antony,

    Very nice essay. One does not have to agree with my approach to physics, to receive due credit for clear original thinking. Physics theory requires deep thinking. I enjoyed your novel approach. Good luck in the contest. I have rated your essay.

    James Putnam

      Hi James,

      Many thanks for your kind comments and rating. There have been some wide ranging approaches, but the whole process has been enjoyable.

      Best wishes for the contest and the future,

      Antony

      Hi Antony,

      I'm glad I read your essay! I think you're on to something significant in recognizing a relationship between black holes and a Fibonacci sequence. I also agree with your conclusion that black holes represent the 'reverse' of the holographic principle. Personally (and I know you didn't ask) I think that black holes are the 'wombs' of baby universes forming from our own.

      I think highly of your essay, and rated it so.

      Best to you,

      Ralph

        Hi Ralph,

        Thanks for the kind comments and rating. Likewise I think highly of your essay and rated it so. I'm glad you enjoyed reading my essay.

        I've heard many good arguments that Black Holes are like baby Universes. My thoughts on this don't stray too far either. I imagine that all Black Holes keep growing and never evaporate.

        I think they lose some mass, but always gain more - i.e. no micro black holes should ever form, because the potential for the to evaporate by Hawking radiation is too high.

        Anyway, the larger Black Holes would then continue to grow until the Universe expands to such an extent that there are only Black Holes and empty space in between (save for virtual particles).

        Then all points in space-time become equivalent - even the singularities of the Black Holes.

        Then there would be a Big Bang - so one infinitely large Universe with finite observable size at any given point.

        Great point to make.

        Best wishes and thanks again,

        Antony

        Dear Antony,

        The introduction of the Fibonacci sequence in this contex is a bold enterprise. Although I start in my essay from a very different position, I appreciate your approach.

        All the best,

        Antoine.

          Dear Antony,

          Somebody took your 2 comments ( 1 my answer ) from my blog. Copy of my lost hacked comment you can find in my blog from 3 aug 2013.

          Michael

            Thank you Antony,

            Your essay is very pertinent and relevant.

            Bits of Wheeler are eDuality that we observe in everything.

            I am writing a book about eDuality that explains all things, even our reasoning.

            You said :

            « By definition, the first two numbers in the Fibonacci sequence are 0 and 1, and each subsequent number is the sum of the previous two. »

            and

            « Both the Fibonacci sequence and Wheeler's foundational question rely upon 0 and 1. »

            I analysed Fibonnacci serie before and find the number « two », and eDuality is at the basis of it, sits at the core of this eReality.

            You are in the right way, continue to developpe the idea of Fibonacci sequence in relation with eDuality.

            Two, couples, pairs, opposites, ... are the bits « 0 » and « 1 » of our eReality.

            The two dimensionalities are everywhere.

            eDuality provides the basis upon which all the Universe is built.

            From the First and Primary Principle (eDuality) we can say significantly : Thing never, absolutely never existed without its opposite.

            eReality is a virtuality, and virtuality is our eReality.

            For me : John Wheeler's dream is eReality.

            « It » from « bit », or « bit » from « It », « It » is a « bit », and « bit » is « It », all have emerged from the same fundamental eReality.

            I also rated highly your essay.

            Please visit My essay.

              All,

              I've lost a lot of comments and replies on my thread and many other threads I have commented on over the last few days. This has been a lot of work and I feel like it has been a waste of time and energy. Seems to have happened to others - if not all.

              I WILL ATTEMPT to revisit all threads to check and re-post something.

              Please can this be retrieved?

              Best wishes,

              Antony

              Dear Antoine,

              Please see message below from Aug. 3, 2013 @ 19:18 GMT.

              It is indeed bold, but as you can see from the comments above, it is quite logical. Thanks for the link over on your thread.

              Best wishes,

              Antony

              Dear Michael,

              I noticed the ratings and comment info disappeared yesterday and today when it returned the comments were gone! i hope they manage to fix this. See my comment below from Aug. 3, 2013 @ 19:18 GMT

              Annoying isn't it! :(

              Thanks I'll repost your comments here too!

              Best wishes,

              Antony

              Michael's post from his blog:

              Dear Antony,

              Thank you for high rank. Let me imagine a continuation of your n-dimensionality logical game. If rational n-dimensionality ( n = -1,0,1,2,3 and we assume that n is rational number ) is accepted ( i.e. there is a mathematical proof ) we can go further and we may admit a new kind of possible dimensionality, expressed by the square root -1 and complex numbers ( why not ? Einstein and Hawking use the square root - 1 as an imaginary time / complex time variable u in physics ).Hence, new unexpected physical generalizations are deduced.

              ( copy of my comment for Antony Ryan by 1 Aug 2013 )

              Thank you Amazigh,

              I agree that nothing can exist without its true opposite. In fact my theory away from the contest has baryon asymmetry occur for such that there is NO missing antimatter and suggests that the true opposite exists as part of every particle.

              Thanks for your comments and your super essay!

              Best wishes,

              Antony

              Note: - message below wrote on Aug. 3, 2013 @ 19:18 GMT

              Dear Antoine,

              Thanks for the link over on your page - I too enjoyed Edwin's essay. It is indeed great to see different approaches to fundamental questions.

              My approach is certainly bold, but perhaps tame compared to my theory which partly unifies the four forces and resolves the paradoxes of cosmogony :o)

              Anyway thanks and best wishes,

              Antony