Dear Dipak:

I think what you are referring to is "dark energy and dark matter" of which we are unable to communicate except for gravity. Matter outside our ability to interact is not knowable. Scientists are actively trying to get additional evidence on what is the nature of this phenomena to extend a complete picture of the Universe.

Mary

7 days later

Dear Ms. Slaby,

I have no wish to be disrespectful to you or to your essay, but I think abstract mathematics and abstract physics and abstract declarations of there possibly being an abstract "Unified Field and Experience Equation" have nothing to do with how the real Universe is occurring for the following real reason:

Do let me know what you think about this: This is my single unified theorem of how the real Universe is occurring: Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of abstract NOTHING. Proof exists that every real astronomer looking through a real telescope has failed to notice that each of the real galaxies he has observed is unique as to its structure and its perceived distance from all other real galaxies. Each real star is unique as to its structure and its perceived distance apart from all other real stars. Every real scientist who has peered at real snowflakes through a real microscope has concluded that each real snowflake is unique as to its structure. Real structure is unique, once. Unique, once does not consist of abstract amounts of abstract quanta. Based on one's normal observation, one must conclude that all of the stars, all of the planets, all of the asteroids, all of the comets, all of the meteors, all of the specks of astral dust and all real objects have only one real thing in common. Each real object has a real material surface that seems to be attached to a material sub-surface. All surfaces, no matter the apparent degree of separation, must travel at the same constant speed. No matter in which direction one looks, one will only ever see a plethora of real surfaces and those surfaces must all be traveling at the same constant speed or else it would be physically impossible for one to observe them instantly and simultaneously. Real surfaces are easy to spot because they are well lighted. Real light does not travel far from its source as can be confirmed by looking at the real stars, or a real lightning bolt. Reflected light needs to adhere to a surface in order for it to be observed, which means that real light cannot have a surface of its own. Real light must be the only stationary substance in the real Universe. The stars remain in place due to astral radiation. The planets orbit because of atmospheric accumulation. There is no space.

Warm regards,

Joe Fisher

Dear Joe:

What I mean with respect to the unified field and experience equation is that all knowledge stems from the mind of the beholders. Some question if there is any meaning to physics if there was no life. I tried to separate out this variable in measurement, then proceeded to try to describe how time was structured. My big point is that without change, of which time is an aspect, there would be working Universe.

I have noted that you dismiss most of the major understandings that are current in modern astronomy. That is your option. It is not my view, however.

Mary Ann

    Dear Mary Ann,

    Thank you for not reporting to Fqxi.org that my comment was inappropriate and by doing so have the Administrator classify it as Obnoxious Spam and remove it.

    Without the exceptionally dedicated meticulous work of the astronomers, and microscope wielders, there would be no way that I could truthfully aver that each galaxy is unique as to its structure and to its distance set apart from all other galaxies. Each star is unique as to its structure and to its distance set apart from all other stars. And each snowflake is unique as to its structure.

    Respectfully,

    Joe Fisher

    Well Joe, to your credit no two electron (and there are quite a few running around) have the same quantum state at the same time. So maybe stars don't either- they at least have different locations in space. If you continue to feel guilty, you can totally remedy this by giving me at 10 on this essay!

    Mary

    11 days later

    Dear Mary Ann,

    I especially liked this important conclusion: "The minimum essential factor determining existence, communication and physics, is the mathematics of change." My high score for accentuation of communication of mathematics, physics and the "LifeWorld" (E.Husserl).

    I invite you to see my analysis of the philosophical foundations of mathematics and physics, the method of ontological constructing of the primordial generating structure, "La Structure mère" as the ontological framework, carcass and foundation of knowledge, the core of which - the ontological (structural, cosmic) memory and information - polyvalent phenomenon of the ontological (structural) memory of Universum as a whole. I believe that the scientific picture of the world should be the same rich senses of the "LifeWorld", as a picture of the world lyricists , poets and philosophers.

    Kind regards,

    Vladimir

      Dearly Beloved Mary Ann,

      Your essay makes an interesting reading.Much more facinating is your inclination to drive home your conclusion using the calculus developed by Newton and Leibniz.You fall among the category of scientists that "add" rather than substract from the existing retinue of knowledge.I adore the progression of your arguments and harbour no hesitation whatsoever in recommending you highly for elevation.

      Keep on flourishing;and please do read;make a comment and rate my essay.

      Remain Blessed.

      Lloyd Tamarapreye Okoko.

      Dear Mary,

      I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

      All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

      Joe Fisher

      Dear Mary Ann,

      Thank you for commenting on my essay.

      Einstein and all of the philosophers were complet6ely wrong about reality because they only attempted to abstractly describe an abstract universe.

      Do you have a real complete skin surface? Does the room you are presently in have a real complete floor, ceiling and walls surfaces? Does every object in the room have a real complete surface? Does everything you have ever seen have a real complete surface? Have you never noticed that no matter in which direction you look, you will only ever see a plethora of partial surfaces that meld seamlessly into one surface?

      Joe Fisher

        5 days later

        Mary,

        I also speak of the vessels of 3 types of reality, the mind, math, and physics and how interconnected they are in bringing our wondrous realities. Examples of quantum biology, DNA mapping, and BB simulation attempts are given: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2345.

        The concept of change does charge our world with dynamics. The connection is not so mysterious with the realities of mind, physics and math to measure. The tool of math is limited by our understanding as part of a type 0 civilization when surely there are type 2 civilizations in the universe whose math works much better than our own.

        What are your thoughts?

        Thanks for sharing your ideas.

        Jim

        Dear Jim:

        I totally agree. The intersection of the mind, math and physics do create our reality. Any new math and the genius that creates it will open up a new school of thought on the Universe and reality because it would link hither to fore abstraction. For instance, say the Supercollider discovers a form of Dark Matter and Dark Energy based on some new math. It may be possible that we now would have a path to multi-dimensional Universes. And, perhaps, EVERYTHING IS PREDETERMINED! Free will is the blown and so is much of our idealization of the meaning of man.

        Mary Ann

        Mary Ann,

        With the new higher-energy runs, they hope to find a higher-mass HIggs and perhaps leads to Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

        Time grows short, so I am revisiting essays I've read to assure I've rated them. I find that I rated yours on 4/17, rating it as one I could immediately relate to. I hope you get a chance to look at mine: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2345.

        Jim