Hello, QSA, thanks for your comments on my essay.
Now they've ive gotten to read yours I like the algorithms.
Hello, QSA, thanks for your comments on my essay.
Now they've ive gotten to read yours I like the algorithms.
Hi Torsten,
Thank you very much for your detailed analysis of my theory, it was the most pleasant surprise and the real reason for joining the contest.
In short, Probability density is what I get from my system. I get the SOLUTION of SE for a particular setup translated into probability density, but not SE per se. Sorry for the sloppy use of the word wave instead of "the probability density".
Since I will be travelling in the next few weeks for my vacation with my family I cannot elaborate too much now. But it is interesting that I had looked at Wiener process early on as a possible link. The nice/strange thing about my theory it links to so many established ideas in physics that is too difficult to pursue a particular one. But I think I am going to give your hint much more time.
Also one important link that I found is that my system seems to be a generalization of Buffon's needle in the sense that both the needle and the lines become random in size. And that leads a series of connections to :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffon's_needle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_geometry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon_transform
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_transform
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twistor_theory
Thanks again for your generous help, and hopefully elaborate more in the future.
Adel
Hi Sadeq,
Thank you for a fascinating look at the power of a simple computational model.
You might enjoy the computational model that I develop in my essay Software Cosmos. I take more of a top-down view, exploring the consequences of looking at the cosmos as a software simulation. I hope you get a chance to read it to see if your model might be compatible with it.
Hugh
Hi Adel,
Thanks for the reply above! I look forward to the material you find, as I think it is good that we are both people who like to explore the Universe in a detailed way fundamental way.
I will rate your essay now top marks. Please have a read of mine and rate if you get chance. I'd appreciate any comments you have for me too.
Very best wishes,
Antony
Adel,
I first passed over your abstract, but am new very glad I read your essay. An excellent presentation of an intriguing model. I'm not a mathematician (though I studied it decades ago) and expected little commonality with my geometrical approach but found unexpected potential and a new insight, so a high scorer if only for that!
I was interested in your resolution of the correspondence between cardinalised maths and curvature, or the line and the circle. I derive uncertainty from the change in that relation with theta and/or the line position, but in 3D+t with the torus and helix. I would be most grateful if you would read and comment on my proposals.
I most anticipated your comments on spin and EPR. I hope my own addressing of this may shed some light on your 'very strange results'. This leads direct to the EPR case where as far as I can tell you suggest the same particle orbital topology that I describe to resolve the case and unify the SR and QM view without FTL. Thopugh very different I think our essays are then equally radical and 'groundbreaking!' (as someone referred in my blog). I hope you agree mine worth a equally high score.
With regard to maths I find that fractal recursive gauges or 'sample spaces' can decode the 'noise' of uncertainty stage by stage, but a distinction at observable scales between the uncertainty of nature and precision of mathematics is required to rationalise the requited approach.
An excellent job, well done. I hope you make the final cut and look forward to your views.
Very best wishes
Peter
Dear Adel Hassen,
We are at the end of this essay contest.
In conclusion, at the question to know if Information is more fundamental than Matter, there is a good reason to answer that Matter is made of an amazing mixture of eInfo and eEnergy, at the same time.
Matter is thus eInfo made with eEnergy rather than answer it is made with eEnergy and eInfo ; because eInfo is eEnergy, and the one does not go without the other one.
eEnergy and eInfo are the two basic Principles of the eUniverse. Nothing can exist if it is not eEnergy, and any object is eInfo, and therefore eEnergy.
And consequently our eReality is eInfo made with eEnergy. And the final verdict is : eReality is virtual, and virtuality is our fundamental eReality.
Good luck to the winners,
And see you soon, with good news on this topic, and the Theory of Everything.
Amazigh H.
I rated your essay.
Please visit My essay.
Hi Manuel,
Thanks for reading my essay, I have read yours and rated it good long time ago. I am on vacation with family with little time to spare.
Thanks
Adel
Hi Antony,
Yes, I have rated yours highly. I am on vacation now, I will comment later. Thanks
Adel
Hi Peter,
Thanks for reading my essay, I have read yours many times. I am on vacation now, I will comment later. I have rated your essay. Thanks
Adel
Dear Adel,
I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.
I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.
You can find the latest version of my essay here:
http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-V1.1a.pdf
May the best essays win!
Kind regards,
Paul Borrill
paul at borrill dot com