Dear Madam/Sir,

Both space and time are emergent properties born out of the perception of sequence. While space is the interval between the ordered sequences of objects that also is the background structure, time is the interval between the ordered sequences of events, i.e., changes in structures by energy.

Dimension of objects is the perception that differentiates the "internal structural space" from the "external relational space". Since such perception is mediated by electromagnetic interaction, where an electric field and a magnetic field move perpendicular to each other in a direction perpendicular to both, we have three mutually perpendicular directions. Dimension is used to determine the state of objects: if fixed, then solid, if fluid, then liquid and if loosely held, then gas, if not related to each other, then plasma radiation. Since time does not fit this description, it is not a dimension.

Number is a property of substances by which we differentiate between similars: if there are no similars, it is one otherwise many. Many can be 2,3,...n depending upon the sequence of individual perceptions. Infinity is like one: without similars. But whereas the dimensions of one are fully perceptible, i.e., discrete, the dimensions of infinity are not fully perceptible: analog and not the same as any discrete number. Since mathematics is accumulation and reduction of similars and partly similars, it is limited to discrete numbers and not analog infinities. Yet, like two different quantities can coexist, two infinities can coexist. Hence space-time coexist and being infinite, coexist with everything else. Thus, everything happens in space-time and it cannot loose its sense. We have written this to weinberg@physics.utexas.edu.

Regards,

mbasudeba@gmail.com

Yuri

In my essay both space and time are discrete. However, if as you propose space is discrete and time is continuous then time is something different from space and therefore cannot be part of a 4d space-time concept. So I agree that 4D space-time would loose it's sense.

Carolyn

Basudeba

If space and time emerge from a perception of sequence does this not require a perceiver? My view is that space is real and exists regardless of whether there is someone to perceive it. We use the concept of space to compare the position of objects and that is useful to us.

The concept of dimension can be seen in different ways. I think of dimension as a degree of freedom, and since time provides a degree of freedom it becomes a dimension.

Carolyn

Hoang cao Hai

Both the absolute and the relative can exist, in that for something to exist it must be absolute, it exists in that piece of space at that time. However everything exists relative to each other. Our whole way of measuring and perceiving the world is based on comparing one thing with another, in space and time. And space and time changes depending on our frame of reference, so relative existence is fundamental to our perception of the world.

Carolyn

Hoang cao Hai

Sorry for a late reply, which I have now posted for your original comments. Thank you for your interest in my esay.

Carolyn

Marina

Thank you for such lovely comments. My aim in entering this contest was to test out the ideas within the physics community and I'm glad that they are being well received.

Carolyn

Manuel

Thank you for reading my essay. The purpose of the piece of nothing was to imagine how something could come from nothing. It is a model. My aim was to get a discrete unit of space that contains energy. The result I ended up with was a unit of space that exists because it contains energy and is vibrating. If there is no energy then there is no space, there is nothing. I like this view of space and energy being dependent on each other for their own existence. It could also mean that the space-time continuum becomes a space-time-energy continuum.

Carolyn

Hon Jia

Thank you for your comments. I also think of time as a change of state. If there were no changes there would be no universe and no time. In my model the change of state is the movement of the space quantum and hence time emerges from the model.

Carolyn

Michel

When I first came across the geon I was interested in matter being made up of trapped light. Although the geon is a defunct idea, the concept of gravity creating a trap at an elementary particle level rather than at a cosmic level is an interesting one (and created public interest in miniature black holes developing when the large hadron collider was turned on).

I have thought about the link between loop quantum gravity and the vibrating quantum model and whether they could be the same thing. My model may be a different way of visualising the loop and the way in which it contains energy. The loop wavefunction would then be the size and shape and energy of the space quantum. Maybe some of the mathematics from LQG could be used.

Thank you for your interest in my essay

Carolyn

Anton

The question regarding something from nothing I interpret more as the fact that we have to start with something for the universe to exist. In my essay I use the something from nothing as a way of explaining the model. My assumption is that energy and space must exist. If the universe was nothing we would not be here discussing it.

Regarding information and interactions I agree that a single charged particle will have no electrical force on it, since a force would require a second electrical charge, however it can still have a charge on it. Information about the charge of the particle can only be known if an exchange or interaction with another charged particle occurs. Hence information is about changes in states.

Regarding your comment on space quantisation, I do not understand why this has to be from an imaginary observer outside the universe. If quantisation of space is how the universe is, then that is how it is from an observer inside the universe as well as from the outside of the universe.

Carolyn

Peter

Apologies if I used the same title, this is my first year in the contest and I did not read last year's essays.

A cloud of quanta is space quanta with energy then two "clouds" of different energy patterns meeting would require the space quanta to match at the boundary. Light can travel at c between and within the clouds since it travels at c within each quantum regardless of it's shape/energy. Then this does derive SR. And as you say there is no absolute background frame. Particles of matter would be curved space, in fact all forces, fields, matter and light would come from curved space.

Thank you for your interest in my essay and I will read and rate your essay.

Carolyn

Joe

Thank you for your comments. I will read your essay so that I can give a more considered response to your comments.

Carolyn

Xiong

Thank you for supportive comments. I will read your essay and comment in your essay section.

Carolyn

Antony

Thank you for your comments. The arrow of time is an important and unresolved problem. I will read your essay.

Carolyn

Angel

Thank you for your comments. I will need to read your essay before I can comment on your points further.

Carolyn

Vladimir

Thank you for your comments. I agree that the point particle/photon is an issue for current physics and although it is a useful concept it is also a limiting one and we are reaching it's limit.

A flexible space-time creating gravity is one of the basis of my essay. I don't see it as complicated , in fact I see it as a simple solution which follows Occam's Razor.

Carolyn

Dear Carolyn,

I am so happy you were not offended by my 4 questions. I managed to annoy some by that post.

I am rating your essay high not because of your answers but the quality of your essay.

Best regards,

Akinbo

*Most PhDs are saying 1011 so that should be the correct answer.

The implication is that most likely in our list of binary choices underlying our information theoretic physics, existence/non-existence would lie at the "very, very deep bottom" in that list. I would value a few comments from a PhD on my essay, even if you cant rate high not being written in the kind of language you may prefer.

Carolyn,

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

Basudeba

It seems to me that you do not agree with my axioms. You assume that mass is a fundamental rather than space. My assumption is that mass is emergent from something more fundamental, which in my essay I am proposing is space and energy. You also seem to question the principles of General Relativity. My essay is based on the assumption that GR is a valid theory.

Carolyn